IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 26.08.2025 Arshdeep Singh ……Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Punjab ……Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Raman Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab.

*****

Sumeet Goel (Oral):

1. Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.126 dated 26.05.2025 under Section 61/1/14 of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 and Sections 123 & 62 of the BNS 2023 registered at Police Station Sidhwan Bet, District Ludhiana Rural; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. On 25.07.2025, the following order was passed:

Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.126 dated 26.05.2025 under Section 61/1/14 of Punjab Excise Act, 1914 and Sections 123 & 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Sidhwan Bet, District Ludhiana Rural. “

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that admittedly, the illicit liquor has been recovered from the conscious possession of co-accused. The petitioner has been nominated as accused merely on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused while in police custody, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law, as the same is hit by Sections 25 & 26 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Sections 23(1) & 23(2) of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023). Further, the petitioner was earlier involved in one FIR under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, however, he has been released on probation.

Notice of motion for 26.08.2025.

Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.”

3. Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation and he is not required for further custodial interrogation.

4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and he is not required for further custodial interrogation, the petition is allowed and the order dated 25.07.2025 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.

5. 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.

6. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of th