AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SUMEET GOELSUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL), 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.112 dated 07.06.2026, registered for offences punishable under Sections 15 & 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur.
On 21.08.2026, the following order was passed:
““Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.112 dated 07.06.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 15 & 29 of NDPS Act, at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 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 from whom the contraband in question has been allegedly recovered & the petitioner is willing to join 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‘Vijay Singh versus The State of Haryana’ bearing Special Leave toSingh versus The State of Haryana’Special Leave to AppealAppeal (Crl.)(Crl.) No(s).1266/2023,No(s).1266/2023 ‘State‘State byby (NCB)(NCB) BengaluruBengaluru vs.vs. PallulabidPallulabid Ahmad Arimutta &Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. State ofAnr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIRTamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592, ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid2020 Supreme Court 5592, ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024 INSC 29INSC 29 and ‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab’‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab’ bearing Special Leave to AppealSpecial Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No.9190/2025.(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 16.09.2026.
State is at liberty to file reply, if so required.
The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 26.08.2026 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.””
Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that pursuant to the order dated 21.08.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation, cooperated therein and the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation.
Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation & cooperated therein, the petitioner 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 21.08.2026, in light of the dicta of judgment passed by this Court in CRMCRM---MMM---5403254032---2024 ‘Ashu Vs. State of2024 ‘Ashu Vs. State of Punjab’Punjab’ and the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘JugrajJugraj SinghSingh Vs.Vs. StateState ofof HaryanaHaryana bearing SpecSpecialial LeaveLeave toto AppealAppeal (Crl.)(Crl.) No.9190/2025No.9190/2025.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed,allowed and the order dated 21.08.2026 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
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.
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.
Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.