[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunny Singh vs State Of Punjab on 22 December, 2025
CRM-
CRM-M-66077-
66077-2025
1
111
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-
CRM-M-66077-
66077-2025
Sunny Singh
....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
Date of decision: December 22,
22, 2025
Date of Uploading: December 22, 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:
Present Mr. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.
*****
SUMEET GOEL,
GOEL, J. (ORAL)
Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of
concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.60 dated
25.07.2025, registered for offences
fences punishable under Section 21-C of the
NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police
Station D Division, District Amritsar.
2. On 21.11.2025, the following order was passed:
"Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.60 dated 25.07.2025
registered for offences punishable under Section 21
21-C
C of NDPS Act
(Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Division
'D', District Amritsar; the petitioner has preferred this petition under
Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeki
seeking pre--
arrest bail.
Counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is
sought to be implicated into the FIR in question solely on the basis of a
disclosure statement made by co-accused
accused from whom the contraband in
question has been allegedly recovered & the petitioner is willing to join
1 of 3
CRM-
CRM-M-66077-
66077-2025
investigation and cooperate therein. In order to buttress his arguments,
learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the dicta of the
judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Vijay Singh vers
versus
us The State
of Haryana' bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1266/2023
No(s).1266/2023,
'State by (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr'
2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, 'Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR
2020 Supreme Court 5592, 'Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya
@ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau' 2024 INSC
29 and 'Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab' bearing Special Leave to Appeal
(Crl.)No.9190/2025.
Notice of motion.
On the strength of advance notice; Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG,
Punjab has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-State of
Punjab.
Adjourned to 18.12.2025
State is at liberty to file reply, if so required.
The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer
on 29.11.2025 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join
investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on
interim bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the
satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when
further called by Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall join the
investigation. He shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section
482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023."
3. Learned State counsel (on instructions ASI Davinderjeet) has
submitted that pursuant to the order dated 21.11.2025, the petitioner has
joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.
4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand;
especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation, he is not
required for custodial interrogation, and he being arrayed as an accused on
the basis of disclosure statement; this Court is inclined to confirm the order
dated 21.07.2025, in light of the dicta of judgment passed by this Court in
CRM--M-54032
CRM 54032--2024 'Ashu Vs. State of Punjab' and the judgment passed
2 of 3
CRM-
CRM-M-66077-
66077-2025
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Haryana bearing
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9190/2025.
5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed, and the order dated
21.11.2025 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby
made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2)
of BNSS.
6. This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not
be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be
confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any
other incident that involves commission of an offence.
7. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for
cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition
stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other
sufficient cause.
8. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not
be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
December 22, 2025
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
