CRM-M-33661- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (206) GURPREET SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab *** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory registered under Sections 108, 351(2) of short “BNS”) at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by the complainant Paramjit Kaur alleging therein that in the morning of 25.12.2 agent, had gone to his shop situated at Grain Market. He consumed some poisonous substance and was rushed to hospital but during the course of treatment he died. He had also left a suicide note to th named therein had taken money from him but did not give the same back and had been extending threats to kill him. She prayed for taking action in the -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH GURPREET SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Gursimran S. Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab *** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No. registered under Sections 108, 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Police District Batala, District The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by the complainant Paramjit Kaur alleging therein that in the morning of 25.12.2025, her elder son Karandeep Singh who was a commission agent, had gone to his shop situated at Grain Market. He consumed some poisonous substance and was rushed to hospital but during the course of treatment he died. He had also left a suicide note to th named therein had taken money from him but did not give the same back and had been extending threats to kill him. She prayed for taking action in the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33661-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 02.07.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Advocate for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) in case arising out of FIR No.7 dated 05.01.2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Police District Batala, District The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by the complainant Paramjit Kaur alleging therein that in the her elder son Karandeep Singh who was a commission agent, had gone to his shop situated at Grain Market. He consumed some poisonous substance and was rushed to hospital but during the course of treatment he died. He had also left a suicide note to the effect that the persons named therein had taken money from him but did not give the same back and had been extending threats to kill him. She prayed for taking action in the (O&M) 2026 under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) 7 dated 05.01.2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Police District Batala, District The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by the complainant Paramjit Kaur alleging therein that in the her elder son Karandeep Singh who was a commission agent, had gone to his shop situated at Grain Market. He consumed some poisonous substance and was rushed to hospital but during the course of e effect that the persons named therein had taken money from him but did not give the same back and had been extending threats to kill him. She prayed for taking action in the AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-33661- matter. On her statement, the aforementioned FIR has been registered. Investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. The petitioner was nominated as an accused during the course of investigation as his name was mentioned by the victim in his suicide note. Apprehending his arrest petitioner moved an applicatio dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 27.03.2026. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Th some money to the deceased, however, there is no material on record to prove the same. The allegations against the petitioner are vague, omnibus, and non specific in nature. The suicide note allegedly left by names of several persons along with various amounts of money. However, it does not attribute any proximate or direct act to the petitioner that could be construed as constituting abetment, instigation, or intentional aid to the commission of suicide by the deceased. There is no proximate or live link between the alleged acts of the petitioner and the suicide committed by the deceased. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is Rajinder Kumar, Komalpreet Singh and GS Sandhu who were also named in the FIR, have been extended benefit of anticipatory to be extended the same benefit. It is, theref deserves to be allowed. -2026 (O&M) 2 matter. On her statement, the aforementioned FIR has been registered. gation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. The petitioner was nominated as an accused during the course of investigation as his name was mentioned by the victim in his suicide note. Apprehending his arrest petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 27.03.2026. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The only allegation against him is that he owed some money to the deceased, however, there is no material on record to prove The allegations against the petitioner are vague, omnibus, and non specific in nature. The suicide note allegedly left by names of several persons along with various amounts of money. However, it does not attribute any proximate or direct act to the petitioner that could be construed as constituting abetment, instigation, or intentional aid to the mmission of suicide by the deceased. There is no proximate or live link between the alleged acts of the petitioner and the suicide committed by the He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. The co Rajinder Kumar, Komalpreet Singh and GS Sandhu who were also named in the been extended benefit of anticipatory to be extended the same benefit. It is, theref deserves to be allowed. matter. On her statement, the aforementioned FIR has been registered. gation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. The petitioner was nominated as an accused during the course of investigation as his name was mentioned by the victim in his suicide note. Apprehending his arrest, the n for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been e only allegation against him is that he owed some money to the deceased, however, there is no material on record to prove The allegations against the petitioner are vague, omnibus, and non- specific in nature. The suicide note allegedly left by the deceased contains the names of several persons along with various amounts of money. However, it does not attribute any proximate or direct act to the petitioner that could be construed as constituting abetment, instigation, or intentional aid to the mmission of suicide by the deceased. There is no proximate or live link between the alleged acts of the petitioner and the suicide committed by the He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not to be effected from him. The co-accused Daljit Singh, Rajinder Kumar, Komalpreet Singh and GS Sandhu who were also named in the bail. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the same benefit. It is, therefore, argued that the petition matter. On her statement, the aforementioned FIR has been registered. gation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. The petitioner was nominated as an accused during the course of investigation as his name was the n for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been e only allegation against him is that he owed some money to the deceased, however, there is no material on record to prove - the deceased contains the names of several persons along with various amounts of money. However, it does not attribute any proximate or direct act to the petitioner that could be construed as constituting abetment, instigation, or intentional aid to the mmission of suicide by the deceased. There is no proximate or live link between the alleged acts of the petitioner and the suicide committed by the He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not accused Daljit Singh, Rajinder Kumar, Komalpreet Singh and GS Sandhu who were also named in the , he too deserves ore, argued that the petition AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-33661- 4. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and specific in nature. He was named in the suicide note. conducting proper and thorough investigation, his custodial interrogation is must. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserve to be dismissed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 6. The petitioner and 10 other persons as named in the suicide note are alleged to have petitioner are that he owed some money to the victim but had not been returning the same and the victim who was under debt taken by some other persons was under pressure for the same. offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS. the provisions of Section suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by act of instigation and doing certain acts to facilitate prosecution must show a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement by the accused in commission of suicide. Allegation of harassment of the deceased by the accused does not suffice in the absence of any positive action on the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed. It is also well settled proposition of law that to prove the offence of abetment, which is defined under Section 45 of BNS -2026 (O&M) 3 Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and specific in nature. He was named in the suicide note. conducting proper and thorough investigation, his custodial interrogation is must. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserve to be dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel s at considerable length. The petitioner and 10 other persons as named in the suicide note are alleged to have abetted suicide by the victim. The allegations against the petitioner are that he owed some money to the victim but had not been returning he same and the victim who was under debt taken by some other persons was under pressure for the same. The petitioner has been booked for commission of offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS. the provisions of Section 108 of BNS, undoubtedly, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by act of instigation and doing certain acts to facilitate the commission of suicide. The prosecution must show a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement by the accused in commission of suicide. Allegation of harassment of the deceased by the accused does not suffice in the absence of any positive action on the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed. It is also well settled proposition of law that to prove the offence of abetment, efined under Section 45 of BNS (which is pari materia with Section Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and specific in nature. He was named in the suicide note. For the purpose of conducting proper and thorough investigation, his custodial interrogation is must. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserve to be dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel The petitioner and 10 other persons as named in the suicide note are abetted suicide by the victim. The allegations against the petitioner are that he owed some money to the victim but had not been returning he same and the victim who was under debt taken by some other persons was The petitioner has been booked for commission of offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS. In order to bring a case within 108 of BNS, undoubtedly, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by act of the commission of suicide. The prosecution must show a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement by the accused in commission of suicide. Allegation of harassment of the deceased by the accused does not suffice in the absence of any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed. It is also well settled proposition of law that to prove the offence of abetment, (which is pari materia with Section Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and For the purpose of conducting proper and thorough investigation, his custodial interrogation is This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel The petitioner and 10 other persons as named in the suicide note are abetted suicide by the victim. The allegations against the petitioner are that he owed some money to the victim but had not been returning he same and the victim who was under debt taken by some other persons was The petitioner has been booked for commission of In order to bring a case within 108 of BNS, undoubtedly, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by act of the commission of suicide. The prosecution must show a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement by the accused in commission of suicide. Allegation of harassment of the deceased by the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide, offence under Section 108 of BNS would not be considered to have been committed. It is also well settled proposition of law that to prove the offence of abetment, (which is pari materia with Section AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-33661- 107 of IPC), it must be the state of mind of the accused to commit a particular crime must also be visible so as to determine the culpability of his action, meaning thereby that there must be some to establish that he or she had a mind, the suicide by the victim was abetted. Reference can be made to Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra and others : 2020 SCC Online SC 964, wherein it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court t bring out an offence under Section 306 of IPC 108 of BNS), specific abetment as contemplated under Section 107 of IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306 of IPC. stage, the element attracting the offence, does not prim thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any conclusion as to commission of offence p can be drawn as against the petitioner. levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no case for his pre-trial incarceration is made out. It is also well set incarceration should not be a replica of post petitioner has expressed his willingness to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency. In view of the discussion as made above the case made out for allowing the petition. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to bail subject to the condition that he -2026 (O&M) 4 , it must be the state of mind of the accused to commit a particular crime must also be visible so as to determine the culpability of his action, meaning thereby that there must be some mens rea to establish that he or she had a guilty mind and in furtherance of that state of mind, the suicide by the victim was abetted. Reference can be made to Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra and others : 2020 SCC Online , wherein it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court t bring out an offence under Section 306 of IPC , specific abetment as contemplated under Section 107 of IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the person d as a result of that abetment is required. intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306 of IPC. stage, the element of mens rea of direct abetment, which is a attracting the offence, does not prima facie emerge from the record. thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any conclusion as to commission of offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS can be drawn as against the petitioner. Given the nature of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no case for his trial incarceration is made out. It is also well set incarceration should not be a replica of post petitioner has expressed his willingness to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency. In view of the discussion as made above the case made out for allowing the petition. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the is ordered to be admitted to bail subject to the condition that he , it must be the state of mind of the accused to commit a particular crime must also be visible so as to determine the culpability of his action, mens rea and some material on record guilty mind and in furtherance of that state of mind, the suicide by the victim was abetted. Reference can be made to Aranb Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra and others : 2020 SCC Online , wherein it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court that in order to bring out an offence under Section 306 of IPC (which corresponds to Section , specific abetment as contemplated under Section 107 of IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the person d as a result of that abetment is required. It was also observed that the intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306 of IPC. At this of direct abetment, which is a sine qua non for a facie emerge from the record. It is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any unishable under Section 108 of BNS Given the nature of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no case for his trial incarceration is made out. It is also well settled law that pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The petitioner has expressed his willingness to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency. In view of the discussion as made above the case is made out for allowing the petition. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the is ordered to be admitted to bail subject to the condition that he shall , it must be the state of mind of the accused to commit a particular crime must also be visible so as to determine the culpability of his action, and some material on record guilty mind and in furtherance of that state of Aranb Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra and others : 2020 SCC Online hat in order to (which corresponds to Section , specific abetment as contemplated under Section 107 of IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the person It was also observed that the intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit At this for It is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any unishable under Section 108 of BNS Given the nature of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no case for his trial conviction sentencing. The petitioner has expressed his willingness to join investigation and cooperate with is made out for allowing the petition. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the shall AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-33661- surrender before the 10 days from today and shall join investigation within that period and also subsequently, as and when required and subject to furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. also not tamper with any any witness acquainted with the facts and circ leave the country, during investigation and permission from the trial Court, s and cellphone number to the Investigating Officer terms and conditions as 7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. 8. Since the main petition has been all any, is rendered infructuous. 02.07.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 5 surrender before the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer within a period of today and shall join investigation within that period and also as and when required and subject to furnishing personal as well as bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. not tamper with any evidence, will not pressu any witness acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, will not leave the country, during investigation and trial of the case, except after permission from the trial Court, shall disclose the details of his Aadhar Card No. and cellphone number to the Investigating Officer terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been all any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer within a period of today and shall join investigation within that period and also as and when required and subject to furnishing personal as well as bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. He will evidence, will not pressurize, induce, extend threats to umstances of the case, will not trial of the case, except after seeking l disclose the details of his Aadhar Card No. and cellphone number to the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by all the envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer within a period of today and shall join investigation within that period and also as and when required and subject to furnishing personal as well as will rize, induce, extend threats to umstances of the case, will not seeking l disclose the details of his Aadhar Card No. and shall also abide by all the It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case owed, pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.