Allowed

Lovepreet Singh Alias Love v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Sept 2025CRM-M/10045/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court made an interim anticipatory bail order absolute in an NDPS case. The petitioner had joined the investigation, and the State did not dispute this or allege his presence at the drug recovery spot. The Court confirmed the order subject to standard bail conditions. It clarified the order is not a blanket protection from arrest for future incidents.

What did the court decide?

The interim anticipatory bail order dated 21.05.2025 was made absolute subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

Lovepreet Singh Alias Love Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

(204)

¶3

CRM-M-10045-2025 Decided on : 01.09.2025

¶4

Lovepreet Singh @ Love

……Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab

……Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

¶10

Present: Mr. Himanshu Raj, Advocate for Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocates for the petitioner (s).

¶11

Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

¶13

Sumeet Goel (Oral):

¶14

The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.317 dated 10.12.2023 under Sections 21(c), 25, 27-A, 61, 85 (Section 29) of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar (Anenxure P-1).

¶15

2. On 21.05.2025, the following order was passed:

¶16

“The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.317 dated 10.12.2023 under Sections 21(c), 25, 27-A, 61, 85 (Section 29) of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar (Anenxure P-1).

¶17

On the previous date of hearing, the State was put to notice. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has not disputed that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot along with the co-accused, from whom a recovery of 300 grams of heroin was allegedly made along with some drug money. It has also not been disputed by the learned State counsel that although a secret

¶18

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.09.01 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh

¶19

CRM-M-10045-2025

¶20

P a g e | 2

¶21

information qua the involvement of co-accused Vijay Kumar @ Harcharan Singh, however, no such secret information had been received regarding the petitioner’s involvement in drug trafficking, and furthermore, on instructions, learned State counsel has apprised the Court that the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents, much less being involved in a case under the NDPS Act.

¶22

Adjourned to 01.09.2025.

¶23

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and appear before the investigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) of BNSS, 2023.”

¶24

Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that the

¶25

petitioner has joined investigation and he is not required for further custodial interrogation.

¶26

Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and he being arrayed as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement, this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 11.07.2025, in light of the dicta of the judgment passed by this Court in CRM-M-54032-2024 ‘Ashu Vs. State of Punjab’ and recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in ‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab’ bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9190/2025 .

¶27

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the order dated 21.05.2025 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.

¶28

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.09.01 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh

¶29

CRM-M-10045-2025

¶30

P a g e | 3

¶31

This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not

¶32

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.

¶33

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.

¶34

Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not

¶35

be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

¶36

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

¶37

(SUMEET GOEL)

¶38

September 01, 2025 JUDGE Naveen

¶39

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶40

NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.09.01 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh

Lovepreet Singh Alias Love v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lovepreet Singh Alias Love v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramjit Singh Vs Pankaj Kumar

Anil Kumar Jain Vs Lalit Jain

Rajinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Satwant Kaur Vs Sunita Rani

Manohar Lal Vs State of Punjab

Paramjit Singh Alias Kaka Vs State of Punjab