Allowed¶30

Ram Singh v. State of Punjab

Anticipatory bail – petition under S.482 BNSS, 2023

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Jul 2026CRM-M/30959/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail granted — Punjab & Haryana High Court, CRM-M No.30959 of 2026, decided 03.07.2026 by Vikram Aggarwal, J — S.482 and S.482(2) BNSS 2023 — FIR No.18 dt.24.01.2026, P.S. Dirba, District Sangrur, ss.419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC — petitioner complied with interim order dt.27.05.2026 by joining investigation — State conceded custodial interrogation not required — interim order made absolute subject to S.482(2) BNSS conditions — co-accused Kamaljit Singh had interim anticipatory bail from Supreme Court (order dt.11.05.2026, Annexure P-6) as contended by counsel.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail — order dated 27.05.2026 made absolute, subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 482(2) BNSS. ¶30

Ram Singh Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

202

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M No.30959 of 2026 Date of Decision:-03.07.2026

Ram Singh

…..Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

¶10

¶11

Present:Mr. Gopal Singh Nahel, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sparsh Chhibber, Advocate for the complainant.

¶13

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J . (ORAL)

¶14

Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the ‘BNSS’) is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.18 dated 24.01.2026 registered under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur.

¶15

Status report by way of affidavit of Rupinder Kaur, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Dirba, filed by learned State counsel in Court, is taken on record.

¶16

On 27.05.2026, the following order was passed by a Coordinate Bench:-

¶17

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

¶18

YAG DUTT 2026.07.03 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶19

CRM-M No.30959 of 2026 -2-

¶20

petitioner in case FIR No.18, dated 24.01.2026, registered under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and he has no concern with the said offence. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is not the beneficiary and he had merely appended his signatures as a witness on the sale deed. He further contends that the alleged sale deed was executed and registered on 30.03.2006 but the FIR in question was registered on 24.01.2026 i.e. after an unexplained delay of about 20 years, casting a serious doubt on the prosecution story. Learned counsel contends that the case is purely of civil nature which has been given criminal colour. Learned counsel contends that the co-accused Kamaljit Singh has already been granted the concession of interim anticipatory bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11.05.2026 (Annexure P-6). He further contends that there is no direct evidence to connect the petitioner with the said offence. He submits that the entire evidence in the present case is documentary in nature and no money trail is to be traced or recovery is to be made from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.

¶22

Notice of motion.

¶23

On asking of the Court, Mr. J.S.Rattu, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and seeks time to file status report in the matter.

¶24

Adjourned to 03.07.2026.

¶25

YAG DUTT 2026.07.03 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶26

CRM-M No.30959 of 2026 -3-

¶27

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.”

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the aforesaid order dated 27.05.2026, the petitioner has duly joined investigation.

¶29

Learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, on instructions from ASI Tarsem Lal, Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur, who is present in the Court, submits that in compliance of the order dated 27.05.2026, the petitioner has duly joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.

¶30

In view of the fact that the petitioner has duly joined investigation and keeping in view the statement given by learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 27.05.2026 is made absolute, subject to compliance of the provisions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶31

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) July 03, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt

¶32

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶33

YAG DUTT 2026.07.03 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Ram Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh 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

Surinder Sharma Vs State of Punjab

Abhijeet Singh Vs State of Haryana

Deva Alias Golu Vs State of Punjab

Simranjeet Singh Alias Simranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Navpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep and Another Vs State of Haryana