Lovepreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 226-1 Decided on: 20.11.2025 Lovepreet Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Ms. Sony, Advocate for Mr. Ankit Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1.

Present petition has been filed, under section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023 (Equivalent to Section 438 Cr. P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case registered, vide FIR No.199 dated 09.08.2025 under Sections 21 and 29 of NDPS Act, at Police Station Samrala Khanna, District Ludhiana.

2.

On 26.09.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Lovepreet Singh, aged about 29 years 09.08.2025 21, 29 of NDPS Act Samrala Khanna Ludhiana

2. As per the case of the prosecution, four individuals were occupying a Swift Dzire car, bearing registration No.PB 12AH 0391, which was parked in front. Upon spotting the police party, all the accused allegedly attempted to flee. During the course of running, one of the young man was seen throwing a momi polythene from the right pocket of his lower garment. He was apprehended by the police and identified himself as Manjinder Singh. He further disclosed the names of three other individuals who managed to escape as Balkar Singh, Rajwant Singh, and Lovepreet Singh (petitioner herein). Following his arrest, Manjinder Singh also named another individual, Acchar Singh (son of Dilbag Singh), alleging that the recovered smack had been supplied by him. Accused Acchar Singh has already been arrested by the police.

3. Counsel for the petitioner contends that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner, and his identity remains unverified with respect to whether he was actually present with the main accused, Manjinder Singh, at the time of the incident. Therefore, petitioner cannot be held liable for any offence punishable under the NDPS Act, solely on the basis of an uncorroborated disclosure statement. Moreover, it appears implausible that, despite the presence of full team of police officials,petitioner, along with two other emptyhanded individuals, could have managed to escape from the spot without being apprehended. Furthermore, petitioner is ready to join the investigation and fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter.

6. On being asked by the Court, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Avtar Singh, informs that petitioner has no previous involvement in any other criminal case.

7. Adjourned to 20.11.2025.

8. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

9. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. " 3.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends in compliance with the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the Court, petitioner has joined the investigation and has extended full cooperation. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

4.

Learned State counsel confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining investigation by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation.

5.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 26.09.2025, passed by the Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 7.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

However, present order would be subject to the submission of his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses, within a period of one week from today. Otherwise, he/she would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 20.11.2025 ankit Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO