FSL Report Can Change the Game: Punjab & Haryana HC Grants Anticipatory Bail in NDPS Case on Subsequent Developments
Case Name: Mohit Bansal v. State of Punjab
Date of Judgment: 27.03.2026
Citation: CRM-M-55698-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra
Held: The High Court held that a successive anticipatory bail petition is maintainable where there is a substantial change in circumstances. A subsequent FSL report altering the nature and quantity of contraband constitutes such a change and can justify grant of anticipatory bail.
Summary: The petitioner filed a second anticipatory bail petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in an FIR registered under the NDPS Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. His earlier petition had been dismissed.
The case arose from a raid conducted at an unauthorized de-addiction centre, where 50 tablets of Lorazepam and 980 loose tablets were recovered. The petitioner was implicated on the basis of disclosure made by a co-accused, as the premises allegedly belonged to him .
The petitioner argued that a significant development had occurred after dismissal of his earlier petition, namely, receipt of the FSL report. As per the report, only 50 tablets contained Lorazepam (a psychotropic substance), while the remaining 980 tablets were found to contain non-psychotropic substances such as Paracetamol, Ibuprofen, and others.
The Court observed that this development materially altered the factual matrix. It reiterated that successive anticipatory bail petitions are maintainable if there is a substantial change in circumstances. The FSL report, in the present case, constituted such a change.
On merits, the Court noted that the petitioner was not present at the spot and no recovery had been effected from him. Further, the quantity of Lorazepam recovered did not fall within commercial quantity, thereby reducing the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The Court also took into account the petitioner’s clean antecedents and willingness to join investigation.
Decision: The High Court allowed the petition and granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It held that the subsequent FSL report significantly diluted the prosecution case, and coupled with the absence of recovery from the petitioner and the fact that the contraband fell below commercial quantity, the petitioner was entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. The petitioner was directed to join investigation and comply with the statutory conditions governing anticipatory bail.