CRM-M-438-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 209 CRM-M-438-2025 Date of decision: 26.03.2025 SANDEEP GIR ....PETITIONER V/s STATE OF PUNJAB ....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL , J. 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.0196 dated 10.12.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC (Section 467, 468, 471 of IPC added later on) at Police Station Sadar Patiala, District Patiala. 2. On 10.01.2025, the following order was passed:- “Contends, inter alia, that even as per the allegations of FIR, no money was paid to the petitioner; rather Rs.3 Lakh is alleged to have been deposited in the account of co-accused, namely, Khushi Ram. Notice of motion. At this stage, Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and seeks time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. Posted for 10.02.2025. In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to interim bail in the present case, till the next date of hearing, on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to his satisfaction. The petitioner is also directed to abide by all the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.” JATIN 2025.03.26 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-438-2025 2 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has stated that pursuant to the order dated 10.01.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation. 4. In view of above, the present petition is allowed and interim order dated 10.01.2025 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 5. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read 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. 6. 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 438(2) Cr.P.C., 1973 or upon showing any other sufficient cause. 7. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. 8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE March 26, 2025 jatin Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No JATIN 2025.03.26 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document