Sukhpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-66165-2025 DECIDED ON: 26.11.2025 SUKHPREET SINGH .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. Kuldeep Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner. SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 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 FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District Petitioner (s) No.

Sukhpreet Singh, aged about 40 years 07.01.2025 15(c) of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on) Phillaur Jalandhar 2.

As per the case of prosecution, petitioner Sukhpreet Singh was present in the truck at the time of its interception near Village Lasara and was actively involved in the carriage and transportation of 144 kg of poppy husk. As per the prosecution, petitioner, along with driver Buta Singh and co-accused Kulwant Singh, knowingly kept the narcotic substance in the vehicle with the intention of unlawfully transporting it. His presence in the truck and his alleged participation in handling the contraband are cited as evidence of his direct involvement in the commission of the offence under Sections 15-C/61/85 of the NDPS Act. 3.

In contrast, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that petitioner has been falsely implicated due to extraneous reasons and LAVISHA 2025.11.26 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

CRM-M-66165-2025 -2personal grudges, particularly as his name does not appear in the FIR. It is submitted that he was later implicated only because he is the registered owner of the truck, despite the fact that he had already transferred it to co-accused Kulwant Singh (his father) through an affidavit dated 19.12.2022.

Further points out that the truck had previously belonged to another co-accused, and these facts regarding ownership and possession have already been acknowledged in earlier bail orders. It is also contended that no other NDPS case is pending against the petitioner except the present one, and his earlier involvement in an NDPS matter was long ago and has since been fully adjudicated. Moreover, petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation, if protected from arrest. Thus, counsel 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. 6.

Since, first anticipatory bail petition, i.e. CRM-M-270542025 filed by the petitioner, was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 18.07.2025, and no change in circumstances has occurred thereafter; present petition for anticipatory bail is not maintainable. Therefore, the same stands dismissed being not maintainable. 7.

At this stage, on request made by counsel for the petitioner, it is clarified that if the petitioner surrenders before the Court concerned or Investigating Officer and files an application for bail, the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 26.11.2025 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2025.11.26 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh