CRM-M-33506 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (286) HXXXX STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Balraj Singh, Advocate and Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Varul Aggarwal, 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 118(1), 126(2), 191(3), 190 of Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) Police Station Civil Line Bathinda, District Bathinda. 2. Heard. 33506-2026 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision : 27.08.2026 Versus STATE OF PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Balraj Singh, Advocate and Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate and r. Varul Aggarwal, Advocate for the complainant **** MANISHA 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 118(1), 126(2), 191(3), 190 of Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) (Section 118(2) of BNS added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Bathinda, District Bathinda. Heard. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CRM-M-33506-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.08.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner r. Varul Aggarwal, 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.134 dated 19.05.2026 registered under Sections 118(1), 126(2), 191(3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya (Section 118(2) of BNS added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Bathinda, District Bathinda. AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-33506 3. The petitioner had joined investigation on 02.08.2026. Learned State counsel has submitted that since some co be apprehended, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Similar argument has been complainant, however, in the circumstances peculiar to the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. It is well incarceration should not be a replica of post into consideration the above discussed facts, the petition is allowed and the order dated 16.06.2026 absolute, subject to comp of BNSS. 4. Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. 27.08.2026 Amit Sharma 33506-2026 (O&M) (2) The petitioner had joined investigation on 02.08.2026. Learned State counsel has submitted that since some co be apprehended, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Similar argument has been raised by learned counsel for the complainant, however, in the circumstances peculiar to the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. It is well-settled proposition of law that pre incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, the petition is allowed and the order dated 16.06.2026 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No The petitioner had joined investigation on 02.08.2026. Learned State counsel has submitted that since some co-accused are yet to be apprehended, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is raised by learned counsel for the complainant, however, in the circumstances peculiar to the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner settled proposition of law that pre-trial conviction sentencing. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, the petition is allowed and the granting interim bail to the petitioner is made liance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 15:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.