IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 213 CRM-M-3594-2025 Date of decision: 06.05.2025 Jaskaran Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. A.P.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Deol, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner in the instant (second) petition is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS') in case FIR No.68 dated 10.06.2023 under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Sections 307, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Khilchian, District Amritsar. 2. On 23.01.2025, while noticing the following submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court had granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner and asked him to join investigation:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that even as per the case of the prosecution, no injury, much less dangerous to life, has been attributed to the petitioner; subsequent to the arrest of the prime accused, co-accused Jugraj Singh was arrested, who had VINAY 2025.05.07 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-3594-2025 allegedly done a recce. When Jugraj Singh was arrested, a recovery of 290 grams of heroin was allegedly effected from him. During his interrogation, co-accused Jugraj Singh claimed that the recovered contraband had been procured by him through co-accused Arshdeep Singh and Sarabjit Singh. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not even alleged to have in any manner participated in drug trafficking nor was he named as one of the accomplices of co-accused Jugraj Singh. Learned counsel submits that the only role attributed to the petitioner in the FIR in question is of a conspirator.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 23.01.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 4. Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation. 5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 23.01.2025, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same. 06.05.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.05.07 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment