Anmol Vs State of Punjab

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsa Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 59 dated 04.05.2024, under Sections 323, 324, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 325 and 326 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Kot Ise Khan, District Moga.

¶15

Allegations are that petitioner along with other accused persons formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object inflicted injuries on the persons of complainant party with their respective weapons.

¶16

Contends that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court on 06.02.2025 and in pursuance thereof, he has already joined investigation; hence, his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶17

HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.16 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

-1-

¶19

CRM-M- 6799-2025(O&M)

¶20

The above factual position is not disputed by learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI-Charanjit Singh and submits that his custodial interrogation is not required at this stage.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book.

¶22

It transpires that petitioner was granted interim protection by this Court on 06.02.2025 and the order reads as under:-

¶23

“Contends, inter alia, that matter has been amicably settled between the parties i.e. accused as well as de facto complainant at their own level.

¶24

Notice of motion.

¶25

At this stage, Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and seeks time to have instructions and/or to file response in the matter.

¶26

Posted for 20.03.2025.

¶27

In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer, but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing.”

¶28

It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation and as on today, his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶29

In view of the above, there is no justification to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 06.02.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS.

¶30

HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.16 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

-2-

¶32

CRM-M- 6799-2025(O&M)

¶33

It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation.

¶34

The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter.

¶35

It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order.

¶36

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

¶37

14.05.2025 Harish Kumar	(MAHA	BIR SINGH SINDHU) JUDGE
	Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
	Whether reportable	Yes/No

¶38

HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.16 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶39

-3-

Anmol v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anmol v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahil Alias Pava Vs State of Haryana

Sandeep and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Another

Balveer Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jaideep Vs State of Haryana and Another

Karanbir Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Harjinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab