CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583 110 110 110 110 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 Simran @ Rekha Sharma State of Punjab Date of Date of Date of Date of Decision: Decision: Decision: 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 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) (erstwhile Section 438 of the Cr. P.C.) petitioner, in case bearing FIR No. offences punishable under Sections Act, 1956, at Police Station Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Mohali. 2. Inspector Narinder Kumar, while pat received secret information to the effect that an area of Pabhat was being operated on rent by one Simran Kaur herein). It was al where she lured innocent girls from different States on the pretext of offering good payment 36583 36583 36583 36583----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 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583----2026 2026 2026 2026 Simran @ Rekha Sharma versus Punjab Decision: Decision: Decision: Decision: July 22 July 22 July 22 July 22, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: July July July July 22222222, 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. Kanhiya Soni, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) Section 438 of the Cr. P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to the in case bearing FIR No.29 dated offences punishable under Sections 3/ 4/ 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, at Police Station Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Mohali. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that Inspector Narinder Kumar, while patrolling along with other police officials, received secret information to the effect that an area of Pabhat was being operated on rent by one Simran Kaur . It was alleged that the said premises were where she lured innocent girls from different States on the pretext of offering good payment and induced them into prostitution. It was further alleged that 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 the petitioner. Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the dated 19.01.2026, registered for the 3/ 4/ 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, at Police Station Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Mohali. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that on 19.01.2026, rolling along with other police officials, received secret information to the effect that an unnamed hotel situated in the area of Pabhat was being operated on rent by one Simran Kaur (petitioner leged that the said premises were being used as a brothel, where she lured innocent girls from different States on the pretext of offering and induced them into prostitution. It was further alleged that 1111 ....Petitioner ....Respondent filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the registered for the 3/ 4/ 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) 19.01.2026, rolling along with other police officials, hotel situated in the petitioner being used as a brothel, where she lured innocent girls from different States on the pretext of offering and induced them into prostitution. It was further alleged that MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583----2026 2026 2026 2026 2222 she was earning substantial illegal gains by exploiting the girls and receiving money from customers. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that a bare perusal of the FIR itself shows that allegations leveled against the petitioner are concocted, improbable and devoid of any merit. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR. Learned counsel has submitted that no offence in question has been committed by the petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that no evidence was found at the spot, thereby, connecting the petitioner with the offence in question. 3.1. Learned counsel has asserted that custodial interrogation should not be used as a punitive measure and is justified only when absolutely necessary for the recovery of material evidence. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and, hence, no useful purpose would be served by sending her behind the bars. On the aforesaid submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is prayed for. 4. Upon notice of motion having been issued, learned State counsel has filed status report by way of an affidavit dated 21.07.2026, in the Court today, which is taken on record. Raising submissions in tandem with the said status report, learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. It has been stated in Paras-4, 5 & 9 of the aforesaid status report as under: ““““4. That thereafter, the police party proceeded to the aforesaid hotel situated on Bhabat Road, where one person was found present at the reception, who was apprehended by the police party and upon inquiry, disclosed his identity as Shailesh Kumar. During interrogation, he disclosed that the aforesaid hotel was being operated by a woman named Simran (petitioner) and he was running the said hotel along with her. He further disclosed that they had been carrying on the business of prostitution from the said hotel, earning substantial profits therefrom and deriving their livelihood from the said activity. He also disclosed that the hotel building had been taken on rent, girls had been engaged for carrying MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583----2026 2026 2026 2026 3333 on the business of prostitution and money was being collected from customers for the said activities. 5. That during the course of investigation, the spot was inspected, site plan was prepared and the statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 180 BNSS. During the search of the aforesaid hotel, conducted in the presence of lady police officials, 3 girls/victims were recovered from one of the rooms of the hotel, who disclosed their names as Savita Devi, Nigor Khan alias Noora and Premo respectively, and after recording their statements, they were released by the Investigating Officer. Further, the drawer situated in the reception cabin of the aforesaid hotel was opened and checked, from where 9 packets of condoms were recovered, which were taken into police possession in accordance with law. The accused Shailesh Kumar was also arrested at the spot in accordance with law. xx xx xx xx ROLE OF THE PETITIONER ROLE OF THE PETITIONER ROLE OF THE PETITIONER ROLE OF THE PETITIONER 9. That the role attributed to the petitioner in the present case/FIR No.29 (supra) is that she was operating the hotel situated on Bhabat Road, Zirakpur, where she was carrying on the business of prostitution by procuring girls from different States on the pretext of providing monetary benefits and supplying them to customers for commercial exploitation. It is further submitted that the petitioner was managing the said activities along with accused Shailesh Kumar, collecting money from customers and deriving substantial profits from the said illegal activities.”””” 4.1. It is, thus, argued that given the seriousness of the offence, there exists a substantial likelihood that the petitioner may abscond from the process of justice and/or tamper with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence, if she is enlarged on bail. Learned State counsel has iterated that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative for the purpose of effective and fair investigation and to unearth the case of the prosecution. On these submissions, dismissal of the present petition is entreated for. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. 6. As per the prosecution case and the material available on record, prima facie, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. It is borne out from the prosecution case that the petitioner is alleged to have been operating the hotel in question from where an organised prostitution racket was being run. As per the prosecution, co-accused Shailesh Kumar, who was found MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583----2026 2026 2026 2026 4444 present at the reception of the hotel, disclosed during interrogation that he was running the hotel along with the petitioner, and that the hotel premises were taken on rent, girls were engaged for carrying out business of prostitution and money was being collaged from the customers. It is further the case of the prosecution that during the search of the hotel, conducted in the presence of lady police officials, 03 girls/victims were rescued from one of the rooms of the hotel. The investigation also resulted in the recovery of other articles from the reception cabin. The material collected during investigation prima facie attributes to the petitioner an active role in the operation and management of the alleged prostitution racket. 6.1. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. 7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation, as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and the preliminary investigation appears to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In State State State State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039] 1039] 1039] 1039], the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36583 36583 36583 36583----2026 2026 2026 2026 5555 ““““6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well- ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third- degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.”””” 8. In view of the seriousness of allegations and the role attributed to the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual matrix of the case in hand. Moreover, the investigation is still underway and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is being sought for effective investigation and to unearth the prosecution case. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed dismissed. 9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July 22 July 22 July 22 July 22, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment