Lovejit Singh @ Sarpanch v. State Of Punjab
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 13.08.2025 Lovejit Singh @ Sarpanch . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Rehan, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.
The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-punder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.
Date Section(s) Police Station District Lovejit Singh @ Sarpanch 11.06.2024 21, 25, 27-A & 29 of NDPS Act and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 State Special Operation Cell, Amritsar District Intelligence Wing (SSOC) 2.
Contention of the petitioner's counsel is that there is recovery of 100 grams of 'Heroin' from the pocket of the petitioner, while he was driving the Activa scooter bearing registration No. PB-18W-7193. Coaccused - Sewak Singh alias Gursewak Singh, who was pillion rider, has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 29.07.2025, passed in CRM-M-39208-2025, titled as, "Sewak Singh alias Gursewak Singh v. State of Punjab" (Annexure P-3). 3.
It is further submitted that petitioner is a young boy of the age
- 2 - of 28 years and he is not found to be indulged in any other similar activity and he being inside jail for a period of about 01 year and 02 months, and the trial being run at very low pace, is entitled for concession of regular bail. Besides, it is also submitted that out of total 14 prosecution witnesses, only 02 have been examined so far. Thus, prays for grant of concession of regular bail for the petitioner. 4.
On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 12.08.2025 in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.
5.
While opposing the prayer of bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of allegations, petitioner does not deserve any leniency. Further submits that if the petitioner is granted concession of bail, there is every likelihood of his being absconding from the trial and can indulge in similar kind of activities.
He also submits that petitioner is involved in several other cases, as reflected in the custody certificate. Thus, he is not entitled for the ceonssion of regular bail.
6.
This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the relevant material on record.
7.
As per the totality of circumstances, and the facts/allegations levelled against the petitioner, and also the factors noticed here-above, this Court deems it appropriate to consider the plea of bail of the petitioner. 8.
Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety
- 3 - bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 9.
Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.
10.
Any of the discussion done and recorded here-above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
11.
It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled.
12.
Petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 13, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No