Lovish Kumar @ Lovish Grover @ Lovi v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 17.10.2025 Lovish Kumar @ Lovish Grover @ Lovi ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present:

Mr. Gursher Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J. S. Arora, DAG, Punjab.

*** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

1.

Present third petition has been filed praying for the grant of interim bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.136, dated 22.03.2025, under Section 25 of Arms Act, Section 18 of NDPS Act and Section 109 of BNS (Section 111 of BNS, Sections 61, 85 of NDPS Act and Sections 54, 59 of Arms Act added later on), registered at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar for a period of 09 days from 17.10.2025 till 25.10.2025 on account of the marriage of real brother of the petitioner which is scheduled for 22.10.2025 to 24.10.2025. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is facing prosecution in FIR No.136, dated 22.03.2025, under Section 25 of Arms Act, Section 18 of NDPS Act and Section 109 of

-2BNS (Section 111 of BNS, Sections 61, 85 of NDPS Act and Sections 54, 59 of Arms Act added later on). He has submitted that presently, the petitioner is in judicial custody and confined in Modern Jail, Patiala. He has submitted that the marriage of real brother of the petitioner is scheduled for 22.10.2025 to 24.10.2025 and hence, presence of the petitioner is essential at the time of the marriage of his real brother. He has thus submitted that the interim bail for a period of 09 days may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

3.

This Court, while issuing notice of motion on 16.10.2025, directed the respondent-State to verify the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and the same has been verified by the State. 4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner is involved in a serious offence. He has submitted that there is not only the recovery of opium and illegal weapons from the petitioner but, however at the time of recovery, the petitioner fired upon the police party. He has thus submitted that no case for the grant of interim bail to the petitioner is made out and hence, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.

5.

The Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 6.

On the appreciation of the merits of the case, it is transpired that there is a recovery of 800 grams of opium, illegal weapons and live

-3cartridges from the petitioner. The petitioner had opened fire upon the police party at the time of the recovery.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any merit in the present petition and thus, the same is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE 17.10.2025 rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No