Allowed¶29

Manpreet Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Nov 2025CRM-M/44098/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-44098-2025, Punjab & Haryana HC, decided 20.11.2025, Aaradhna Sawhney J — pre-arrest bail under S.482 BNSS allowed in NDPS FIR 09/2025 (S.21-C, S.29 added via DDR); accused implicated on disclosure statement of co-accused caught with 550 g heroin; petitioner joined investigation; interim bail confirmed with S.482(2) BNSS conditions.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted: interim bail of 13.08.2025 confirmed subject to Section 482(2) BNSS conditions; petitioner to join investigation as and when required by written notice of the Investigating Officer, not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court. ¶29

Manpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

CRM-M-44098-2025

¶2

-1-

¶3

218 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-44098-2025 Decided on: 20.11.2025

Manpreet Singh

.... Petitioner

versus

State of Punjab

.... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY

¶11

Present: Ms. Apurva Walia, Advocate Mr. Manik Moudgil, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

Aaradhna Sawhney, J. (Oral)

¶15

By virtue of the present petition under Section 482 BNSS, petitioner, who is co-accused in case bearing FIR No.09 dated 18.01.2025 registered under Section 21-C of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on vide DDR No.35 dated 22.01.2025) registered at Police Station Shri Hargobindpur, District Gurdaspur. has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶16

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Rawail Singh states that the petitioner has joined the investigation and has not needed for any further investigation.

¶17

On 13.08.2025, following order was passed by this Court:-

¶18

“Petitioner prays for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR No.09 dated 18.01.2025 registered under Sections 21-C of NDPS Act (Section 29of NDPS added later on vide DDR No.35 dated 22.01.2025) at Police Station Shri Hargobindpur, District Gurdaspur.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has not been named in the present FIR nor there is

¶20

SONIA BURA 2025.11.21 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CRM-M-44098-2025

¶22

-2-

¶23

any averment in the FIR, which even remotely connects the present petitioner with the commission of crime. As per the prosecution version, Aman, co-accused, was arrested by the police, while he was carrying 550 grams of heroin and on his disclosure statement, the petitioner has been nominated as an accused in the present case. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is a first offender and was never involved in any other criminal activities.

¶24

Notice of motion.

¶25

On the asking of Court, Mr. Ravneet Joshi, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶26

List on 01.10.2025.

¶27

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation. In the event of arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of arresting/investigating officer subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C./482 (2) of BNSS, 2023.”

¶28

Keeping in view the fact that petitioner has joined the investigation, interim bail granted vide order dated 13.08.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. Further, the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶29

The petition stands allowed.

¶30

20.11.2025 (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) sonia JUDGE

¶31

Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶32

SONIA BURA 2025.11.21 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Manpreet Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manpreet Singh 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

Udham Singh Vs State of Haryana

M/S Vicky Trading Co. and Another Vs M/S I.S. Fertilizers Coop.

Parveen Sachdeva Vs Rajesh Kumar Gandhi

Pankhuri Ohri Alias Pankhuri Garg Vs State Bank of India and Another

Sukhbir Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab

M/S Tayal India Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Sidhu Tour and Travels Pvt. Ltd. and Another