CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----31277 31277 31277 31277 104 (1 104 (1 104 (1 104 (1stststst case) case) case) case) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Sukhcharan Singh State of Punjab Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present Present Present Present: SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 concession of 18.04.2026, under Section 303(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Kabirpur, District Kapurthala 2. petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 31277 31277 31277 31277----2026 2026 2026 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----31277 31277 31277 31277----2026 2026 2026 2026 Sukhcharan Singh versus Punjab Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: July 16 July 16 July 16 July 16, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: July 16 July 16 July 16 July 16, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Jaswinder Singh Randhawa, (presence marked through video presence marked through video presence marked through video presence marked through video Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Mr. Aditya Anand, Advocate for the complainant. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner , under Section 303(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Kabirpur, District Kapurthala. On 04.06.2026, the following order was passed: ““““This petition for pre-arrest bail is the first petition petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.19 dated 18.04.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 303(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Kabirpur, District Kapurthala. 2. Notice of motion. 3. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG Punjab respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. 4. Heard. 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH 2026 2026 2026 2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Jaswinder Singh Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner presence marked through video presence marked through video presence marked through video presence marked through video----conferencing conferencing conferencing conferencing). Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. Advocate for the complainant. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of to the petitioner, in case FIR No.19 dated , under Section 303(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station he following order was passed: arrest bail is the first petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.19 18.04.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Kabirpur, District Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG Punjab appears on behalf of State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby ....Petitioner ....Respondent Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the for grant of dated , under Section 303(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.19 18.04.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Kabirpur, District appears on behalf of State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.16 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----31277 31277 31277 31277----2026 2026 2026 2026 2222 5. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the genesis of dispute between the petitioner and the complainant is of ex parte civil Court money decree for recovery of Rs.1,58,871/-, qua which the execution petition is pending before the learned Executing Court. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, for the recovery of abovementioned decreetal amount, the standing crop of the petitioner was attached by the learned Executing Court on 31.07.2025, and the abovementioned order was challenged before this Court. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.2 lacs in the Registry and permitted the petitioner to harvest the standing crop. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that in view of abovementioned events, the possession of the agricultural land continued with the petitioner only, but without transfer of possession, the complainant lodged the FIR for the commission of theft of standing crop in the land. 6. The learned State Counsel has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel that the petitioner has not approached this Court with bona fide intentions, and that he is guilty of not complying with the decree passed by the Civil Court. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that the decree has already become final, as the petitioner has lost the case before the Hon’ble Apex Court. While claiming that despite approval of decree by Hon’ble Apex Court, when the petitioner failed to pay money, his land was attached. It has further been contended by learned State Counsel that the petitioner has no right to cultivate or harvest the standing crop and thus, they are responsible for the commission of offence, for which they have been prosecuted. The learned State Counsel has sought for dismissal of present petition. 7. The record has been perused carefully. 8. A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a decision:- i. that the offence is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate; ii. that the maximum punishment prescribed for the commission of abovementioned offence is imprisonment up to three years; iii. that the genesis of dispute between the parties is a civil Court decree, i.e. for a sum of Rs.1,58,871/- and the abovementioned amount already stands cleared in view of direction issued by this Court in compliance of which the petitioners have deposited a sum of Rs.2 lacs in the Court; iv. that apparently there is nothing on record to show that the possession of the land, where the crop was cultivated, was ever transferred to the complainant or anybody else; v. that the investigation and trial are not likely to be concluded in near future; vi. that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not likely to produce a fruitful result; vii. that detention of the petitioner in judicial lock-up is not likely to serve any purpose; viii. that there is nothing on record to show that while on interim anticipatory bail, the petitioner is likely to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses; and ix. that there is nothing on record to show that while on interim anticipatory bail, the petitioner will not participate/cooperate in the investigation. 9. Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors, it is hereby held that the petitioner is entitled for interim anticipatory bail. 10. Thus, it is hereby ordered that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.16 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----31277 31277 31277 31277----2026 2026 2026 2026 3333 bonds to the satisfaction of arresting officer. However, in the meantime the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer. He shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. 11. List on 13.07.2026. 12. Let status report and detailed reply, if any, be filed by the State by next date. 13. To be shown in urgent list. 14. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case.” ” ” ” 3. Learned State counsel (on instructions) has stated that pursuant to the order dated 04.06.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, and in case, the petitioner is extended the concession of anticipatory bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice and interfere in the prosecution evidence. On the strength of these submissions, dismissal of the petition in hand is entreated for. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record; especially in view of the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not being sought for by the State; the interim order dated 04.06.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 6. Petition stands allowed allowed allowed allowed, accordingly. 7. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read as granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.16 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----31277 31277 31277 31277----2026 2026 2026 2026 4444 8. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 or upon showing any other sufficient cause. 9. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July 16 July 16 July 16 July 16, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.16 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment