CRM-M-32912-2025 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 229 CRM-M-32912-2025 Decided on : 19.08.2025 Lovepreet Singh @ Lovely . . . Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Sahil Goel, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Bareen Pratap Singh, AAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Lovepreet Singh @ Lovely 26 13.03.2025 15, 25, 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 Meharban Ludhiana 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the case of the prosecution, information was received that petitioner-Lovepreet Singh, along with co-accused-Sukhdev Singh @ Laddu, is alleged to have brought poppy husk powder concealed in the cabin of their truck (Tata, white and yellow, registration number HR74A6621) from other states for further supply. On search, 55 kilograms of poppy husk was recovered from the cabin of the truck driven by Sukhdev Singh. Counsel further submits that the co-accused has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order RASHMI 2025.08.19 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32912-2025 - 2 - dated 05.08.2025 in CRM-M-40823-2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that only 5 grams of the poppy husk is marginally above the maximum limit of the ‘non- commercial’ quantity. Petitioner is not involved in any other case and has been falsely implicated in the present matter. It is further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the challan has already been filed before the trial court; however, the process of recording prosecution evidence has not yet commenced. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for bail, submitting that the offence is serious in nature and the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. However, the State counsel does not dispute the other factual aspects of the case and admits that investigation has been completed, the challan submitted, and charges framed, but the recording of prosecution witnesses’ statements is yet to begin. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. It is noticed that petitioner is in custody since 13.03.2025 and has suffered incarceration for about five months and one day. Petitioner is 29 years old and has no previous involvement in any similar activity. Considering that the investigation is complete, the recovery of contraband is marginally above the maximum ‘non-commercial’ quantity, and the fact that the co-accused, namely Sukhdev Singh @ Laddu, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, the prayer for bail merits consideration. Therefore, considering the totality of circumstances, and the nature allegations leveled against the petitioner, and RASHMI 2025.08.19 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32912-2025 - 3 - the factors noted here-above, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. 6. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 7. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 8. The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. 9. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. 10. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 19, 2025 Rashmi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RASHMI 2025.08.19 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document