Protection against self-incrimination bars compulsory custodial interrogation; anticipatory bail ordered where accused cooperates with investigation.

Anticipatory bail was granted for an owner of a vehicle not named in the FIR who has joined and is cooperating with the investigation into alleged narcotics and drug control offences; the State must complete its investigation but cannot compel the appellant to surrender constitutional protection against self-incrimination, and no present grounds justified custodial interrogation. The appellant is to be released on bail if arrested, subject to bail terms to be fixed by the trial court and compliance with the specified provision of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant, who was not named in the FIR but is owner of the vehicle from which 710 bottles of cough syrup were seized and who has joined and is cooperating with the investigation, is entitled to anticipatory bail and protection from custodial interrogation.

Analysis: The proceedings concern allegations under Sections 8, 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 13 and 5 of the Drugs (Control) Act, 1950, and the appellant was earlier granted interim protection on condition of joining and cooperating with the investigation. The State has a duty to complete its investigation in accordance with law but cannot compel the appellant to surrender his constitutional protection against self-incrimination. The appellant has joined and is cooperating with the investigation; there are no presently disclosed grounds necessitating custodial interrogation.

Conclusion: Relief in the form of anticipatory bail is granted in favour of the appellant; the impugned High Court order dated 16.09.2025 is set aside and, if arrested in relation to the FIR, the appellant shall be released on bail forthwith on terms to be fixed by the trial court. The appellant shall comply with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

---