CRM-M-58151 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (106) VISHAW PAL SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.96 dated 29.08.2025, registered under Sections 316(2) and 85 of the BNSS (erstwhile Sections 406 and 498 Commissionerate, District Jalandhar Ci 2. made in the FIR are false and incorrect, and that the complainant left the company of the petitioner of her own volition. 3. appearance on behalf of the complainant and submitted that the petitioner has concealed material facts from this Court. petitioner obtained a decree of divorce in Uttar Pradesh by providing an incorrect address 58151-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH VISHAW PAL SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mr. Mohd. Jameel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. ***** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The prayer in the present petition is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.96 dated 29.08.2025, registered under Sections 316(2) and 85 of the BNSS (erstwhile Sections 406 and 498-A of the IPC) at Police Station Women, Police District Police Commissionerate, District Jalandhar City. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the FIR are false and incorrect, and that the complainant left the company of the petitioner of her own volition. At this stage, Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, has put in arance on behalf of the complainant and submitted that the petitioner has concealed material facts from this Court. petitioner obtained a decree of divorce in Uttar Pradesh by providing an incorrect address of the respondent and has since solemnized a second 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-58151-2025 Date of Decision:- 17.10.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Mr. Mohd. Jameel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. The prayer in the present petition is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.96 dated 29.08.2025, registered under Sections 316(2) and 85 of the BNSS (erstwhile Sections A of the IPC) at Police Station Women, Police District Police Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the FIR are false and incorrect, and that the complainant left the company of the petitioner of her own volition. At this stage, Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, has put in arance on behalf of the complainant and submitted that the petitioner has concealed material facts from this Court. Counsel contends that the petitioner obtained a decree of divorce in Uttar Pradesh by providing an has since solemnized a second 1 17.10.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents The prayer in the present petition is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.96 dated 29.08.2025, registered under Sections 316(2) and 85 of the BNSS (erstwhile Sections A of the IPC) at Police Station Women, Police District Police Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the FIR are false and incorrect, and that the complainant left the At this stage, Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, has put in arance on behalf of the complainant and submitted that the petitioner contends that the petitioner obtained a decree of divorce in Uttar Pradesh by providing an has since solemnized a second MANJU 2025.10.18 16:52 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-58151 marriage. Counsel complainant, who is suffering from stage IV cancer. 4. 5. extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. Despite being a doctor by profession, which cannot be permitted. of the respondent circumvent his responsibilities as a husband, process of law. 6. the petition is dismissed. . October 17, 2025 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: 58151-2025 Counsel further submits that the petitioner abandoned the complainant, who is suffering from stage IV cancer. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The conduct of the petitioner does not entitle xtraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. Despite being a doctor by profession, the petitioner has attempted to hoodwink the process of law, which cannot be permitted. Petitioner was fully aware of the correct address of the respondent-wife and her medical condition, yet in order to circumvent his responsibilities as a husband, process of law. This Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. October 17, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No 2 further submits that the petitioner abandoned the complainant, who is suffering from stage IV cancer. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The conduct of the petitioner does not entitle him to the xtraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. Despite being a doctor by has attempted to hoodwink the process of law, was fully aware of the correct address ical condition, yet in order to circumvent his responsibilities as a husband, petitioner has abused the This Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE 2 further submits that the petitioner abandoned the to the xtraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. Despite being a doctor by has attempted to hoodwink the process of law, was fully aware of the correct address ical condition, yet in order to has abused the This Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, MANJU 2025.10.18 16:52 I agree to specified portions of this document