Allowed

Ajay Sharma v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Mar 2026CRM-M/7428/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order confirms interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner on 09.02.2026. The High Court, noting the petitioner joined the investigation, reiterates conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, influence on witnesses, or leaving the country without permission.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted on 09.02.2026 confirmed subject to conditions in Section 482(2) BNSS and direction to join investigation when required.

Ajay Sharma Vs State of Punjab — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-7428-2026

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

210

¶5

CRM-M-7428-2026 Date of decision: 24.03.2026

Ajay Sharma

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY

¶11

Present : Ms. Vanshika Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Darshan Singh Malwai, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶13

¶14

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)

¶15

By virtue of the present petition under Section 482 BNSS, petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.64 dated 09.04.2025 registered under Sections 408, 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Moti Nagar, District Ludhiana, has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶16

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Ajmer Singh, submits that petitioner has joined the investigation and is not needed for further investigation.

¶17

On 09.02.2026, following order was passed by this Court:-

¶18

“The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail for the petitioner in FIR No.64 dated 09.04.2025 under Sections 408, 420 and 120-B of IPC registered at Police Station Moti Nagar, District Ludhiana.

¶19

The allegations against the petitioner are that being an employee of a pharmaceutical company, he sold the sample medicines which were meant “not for sale” and thus caused loss to the company.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and the allegations are based only on the internal inquiry report prepared by the company itself, which cannot be treated as conclusive.

¶21

Notice of motion.

¶22

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and prays for some time for filing reply.

¶23

HAMANT 2026.03.25 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-7428-2026

¶25

¶26

On his request, adjourned to 24.03.2026.

¶27

Reply, if any, be filed on or before the adjourned date with advance copy to the learned opposite counsel.

¶28

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating Agency/Officer. In the event of the petitioner joining investigation, he shall be admitted to interim bail by the arresting/investigating officer on his furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting/investigating officer subject to the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.]:-

¶29

i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶30

ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶31

iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;

¶32

iv) such other condition(s) as may be imposed under subsection (3) of Section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.”

¶33

Keeping in view the fact that petitioner has joined the investigation, interim bail granted vide order dated 09.02.2026 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. Further the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will neither tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and nor will leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶34

The petition stands allowed.

¶35

	(AARADHN JU	A SAWHNEY) DGE
24.03.2026
Hemant
	Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes	/ No
	Whether reportable : Yes	/ No

¶36

HAMANT 2026.03.25 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ajay Sharma v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Sharma v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil @ Abid Vs State of Haryana

Meharwan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagir Masih @ Kali Vs State of Punjab

Saneha and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Simranjit Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab