Allowed¶31

Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Nov 2025CRM-M/4319/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail confirmed; interim bail order dated 27.01.2025 made absolute; FIR No.126 dated 22.11.2024, PS Joga, District Mansa; Sections 105, 61(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; Section 482(2) BNSS 2023 conditions; petitioner joined investigation 14.11.2025; custodial interrogation not required; Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka v. State of Punjab; CRM-M-4319-2025; decided 18.11.2025; Justice Sanjay Vashisth; non-reportable.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: interim (ad-interim) bail order dated 27.01.2025 made absolute, subject to the petitioner continuing to join the investigation as and when required and abiding by the terms and conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. ¶31

Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in FIR No.126 dated 22.11.2024 under Sections 105, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Joga, District Mansa. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

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

¶35

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no longer required, the ad-interim bail order dated 27.01.2025 passed by this Court is made absolute.

¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — CRM-M-4319-2025, High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 18.11.2025 (Sanjay Vashisth, J.). Petitioner Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka sought anticipatory bail in FIR No.126 dated 22.11.2024 under Sections 105, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Joga, District Mansa (counsel contended there was no eye-witness and, per the Post Mortem Report, no physical injuries on the deceased, negating forcible administration of drugs). By order dated 27.01.2025 the Court had issued notice of motion, directed the petitioner to join the investigation, and granted interim bail in the event of arrest under the Section 482(2) BNSS conditions. On confirmation that the petitioner joined the investigation on 14.11.2025 and that custodial interrogation was not required (per learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Jarnail Singh), the ad-interim order dated 27.01.2025 was made absolute and the petition was allowed, subject to continued co-operation with the investigation and compliance with Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. Marked non-reportable.

¶1

CRM-M-4319-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

103

¶5

CRM-M-4319-2025

¶6

Decided on: 18.11.2025

¶7

SUKHWINDER SINGH @ GHUKA

…...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

…...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶13

Present: Ms. Shefali, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶15

¶16

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

¶17

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.126 dated 22.11.2024 under Sections 105, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Joga, District Mansa.

¶18

On 27.01.2025, following order was passed:-

¶19

“ Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.126 dated 22.11.2024 under Sections 105, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Joga, District Mansa.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the deceased was found lying on the outskirts of the village along with an empty syringe besides him which had been allegedly used to administer drugs to him. It has been argued by the learned counsel that there is no eye witness to the occurrence in question and only because the petitioner is involved in a case under the NDPS Act, he along with five other persons have been nominated as accused on the allegations that it was the petitioner who after conniving with all the co-accused forcibly administered some intoxicant to him. It has also been asserted that as per the Post Mortem Report of the

¶21

LAVISHA 2025.11.18 17:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶22

CRM-M-4319-2025

¶23

¶24

deceased also there were no physical injuries reflected on his person, hence, there was no question of the deceased being forcibly administered drugs. Notice of motion.

¶25

On asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Deol, Sr. DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and seeks time to get necessary instructions.

¶26

Adjourned to 05.05.2025.

¶27

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 482(2) of the BNSS.”

¶28

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 27.01.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

¶29

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Jarnail Singh, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 14.11.2025 by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶31

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 27.01.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.

¶32

LAVISHA 2025.11.18 17:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶33

CRM-M-4319-2025

¶34

¶35

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.

¶36

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

¶37

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶38

18.11.2025 Lavisha

¶39

Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/ NO Whether Reportable: YES/ NO

¶40

LAVISHA 2025.11.18 17:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghuka v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh @ Kannad Vs State of Haryana

Harjit Singh Vs Satnam Singh

Akashdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Nobalpreet Singh @ Nobel Vs State of Punjab

Sahil @ Teju Vs State of Haryana

Ghanshyam Vs State of Haryana