Appeal dismissed — ruling against Rajpreet Singh (Petitioner)
In Short
Police caught two men in a car with over 100 grams of heroin, and those men claimed they bought the drugs from Rajpreet Singh. When Rajpreet asked the court for protection from arrest, the High Court refused because he had a history of other drug cases and the police needed to question him to find the source of the drugs.
The Parties
Party A: Rajpreet Singh
Party B: State of Punjab
Advocates & Judges
For Party A: Learned Advocate Mr. J. S. Sandhu, Learned Advocate Mr. Imaan Singh Khara, and Learned Advocate Mr. Prince Pal
For Party B: Learned Advocate Mr. Vivek Sharma
Judge(s): Hon'ble Justice Manisha Batra
What the Case Was About
Police officers on patrol found a suspicious Fortuner car parked on a highway in Talwandi Sabo. Two young men were sitting inside, and when officers searched the car, they discovered a plastic pouch containing 102 grams of heroin hidden in the armrest box. After the police arrested the two men, they questioned them about where the drugs came from. The two men named Rajpreet Singh and another person as their suppliers. Because of these statements, the police added Rajpreet to the criminal case. Fearing that the police would arrest him, Rajpreet filed a petition in court asking for anticipatory bail, which is a court order protecting a person from being arrested before a trial takes place. A lower court already rejected his request, so he brought the matter to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
Judgment Date
31.10.2026
The Outcome
The High Court dismissed the petition, ruling against Rajpreet Singh and deciding that he would not be granted pre-arrest protection.
What the Court Looked At
- The court noted that police recovered 102 grams of heroin from two co-accused individuals who named the petitioner as their supplier.
- The court observed that questions about whether a statement given to the police can be used as evidence must be decided later during a full trial.
- The court found that the petitioner had admitted in his own court paperwork that he was already involved in five other criminal cases under the strict narcotics laws.
- The court concluded that police custody was necessary so officers could investigate the entire drug supply chain and find where the illegal substances came from.
"In case his custodial interrogation is denied to the investigating agency, the same will leave many glaring loopholes and gaps adversely affecting the investigation."
What This Means For You
Getting named by someone else caught with illegal drugs is a very dangerous situation that can quickly drag you into a major police investigation. In this case, the petitioner's past criminal history of facing five other drug-related cases played a massive role in convincing the judge that he should not receive protection from arrest. When courts look at people accused of narcotics offenses, any prior record makes it extremely difficult to convince a judge of your innocence at an early stage. If you or someone you know is facing sudden police allegations or a difficult criminal case, Setback Solutions can help you understand your choices and coordinate next steps with clarity.
You Still Have Options
If you are facing a false FIR, dealing with a sudden police investigation, or feeling stuck after a court setback, it can feel overwhelming and frightening. Please know that this is not the end of the road, and you can still explore helpful paths like getting a second opinion, changing your legal counsel, or seeking non-judicial guidance. Reach out to Setback Solutions for help understanding your options and coordinating the next step. Setback Solutions is not a law firm and does not give legal advice or guarantee any result, but we are here to provide plain-language help and coordination when you need it most.