CRM-M-28319 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (207) DEV RAJ STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Ms. Sujata, Advocate for Mr. Sidhant Vermani, Advocate for the complainant MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. registered under Sections 117(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 307, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) Division, Amristar City, District Amritsar. 2. Vide order dated petitioner was released on interim bail and was directed to join investigation. 28319-2026 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision : 08.07.2026 Versus STATE OF PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Ms. Sujata, Advocate for Mr. Sidhant Vermani, Advocate for the complainant **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) Through the instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. registered under Sections 117(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 307, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) Division, Amristar City, District Amritsar. Vide order dated 19.05.2026 passed by this Court petitioner was released on interim bail and was directed to join IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CRM-M-28319-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 08.07.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sidhant Vermani, Advocate for the complainant Through the instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.98 dated 23.04.2026 registered under Sections 117(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 307, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) at Police Station B .2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner was released on interim bail and was directed to join AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.08 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-28319 3. Learned State counsel on instructions states that the petitioner has joined the investigation on required as he has not cooperated with the investigation has not got recovered the iron rod used by him in the commission of the subject crime. Therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 4. The petitioner joined investigation on 25.05.2026. So far as the non recovery is concerned, mere non recovery cannot by itself be a ground for denial of bail as has also been observed by the Delhi High Court in case titled as ‘ and in case titled as ‘ (Criminal) 503 operated with the investigation, it may be stated that the behavior attributed to the petitioner cannot be considered as an instance of non justifying denial for grant of pre investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may see granted to him. It is well settled that the purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to compulsorily divulge self information. In the instant case, the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation. Accordingly, the present petition 28319-2026 (O&M) (2) Learned State counsel on instructions states that the petitioner joined the investigation on 25.05.2026 but his custodial interrogation is required as he has not cooperated with the investigation has not got recovered the iron rod used by him in the commission of the subject crime. Therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. The petitioner joined investigation on 25.05.2026. So far as the non recovery is concerned, mere non recovery cannot by itself be a ground for denial of bail as has also been observed by the Delhi High Court titled as ‘Jagdish Thakkar vs. State of Delhi’, 1992 (3) CCR 2764 and in case titled as ‘Pooran Singh vs. State of Delhi’, 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 503. With regard to contention that the petitioner has not co operated with the investigation, it may be stated that the behavior attributed e petitioner cannot be considered as an instance of non justifying denial for grant of pre-arrest bail since, an accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. It is well settled that the purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to compulsorily divulge self information. In the instant case, the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation. Accordingly, the present petition Learned State counsel on instructions states that the petitioner but his custodial interrogation is required as he has not cooperated with the investigation has not got recovered the iron rod used by him in the commission of the subject crime. Therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. The petitioner joined investigation on 25.05.2026. So far as the non recovery is concerned, mere non recovery cannot by itself be a ground for denial of bail as has also been observed by the Delhi High Court of Delhi’, 1992 (3) CCR 2764’ Pooran Singh vs. State of Delhi’, 2022(1) RCR . With regard to contention that the petitioner has not co- operated with the investigation, it may be stated that the behavior attributed e petitioner cannot be considered as an instance of non-cooperation, arrest bail since, an accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under k withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. It is well settled that the purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to compulsorily divulge self-incriminating information. In the instant case, the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation. Accordingly, the present petition AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.08 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-28319 is allowed and the order dated petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of BNSS. 5. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not merits of the case. 6. Since the main petition application, if any, is rendered infructuous. 08.07.2026 Amit Sharma 28319-2026 (O&M) (3) is allowed and the order dated 19.05.2026 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of BNSS. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been disposed of, application, if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down It is, however, clarified that the observations made be construed as an expression of opinion on the has been disposed of, pending (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.08 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.