IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-491-2025 Date of decision: 28.04.2025 RANJIT SINGH ….APPELLANT Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rajinder Singh Bhatta, DAG, Punjab. **** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of the instant appeal the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 22.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar in case FIR No.58 dated 09.07.2024 registered under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 333/351(2), 61(2) BNS titled as ‘Ranjit Singh vs. State of Punjab’ whereby, the application for grant of anticipatory bail moved by the appellant was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in compliance to the orders dated 12.03.2025 and 03.04.2025 passed by this Court, the appellant has already joined the investigation and as such prayed for confirming the interim bail granted vide orders dated 12.03.2025 and 03.04.2025. 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Surinderpal, intimates the Court that the appellant has joined investigation and is neither required for further investigation nor for any custodial interrogation. KANIKA 2025.04.29 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRA-S-491-2025 2 4. During the course of hearing on 12.03.2025, following order was passed: “ 3. Heard. 4. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has no concern with the allegations levelled in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that the appellant is neither named in the FIR nor any specific overt act is attributed to the appellant regarding having uttered any casteist remarks as alleged. The appellant is not having any criminal antecedents and hence, seeks concession of bail. 5. Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant by arguing that the appellant has not been specifically named but has been mentioned as the son of Keer Singh in the FIR, however, has not disputed the fact that no injury has been attributed to the said son of Keer Singh. 6. Be it the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the appellant is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and in the event of his arrest, he is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. 7. Investigating Officer of the case to remain present along with record on the next date of hearing. 8. List on 03.04.2025.” 5. Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the appellant had joined the investigation consequent to the orders dated 12.03.2025 and 03.04.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide orders dated 12.03.2025 and 03.04.2025 is hereby KANIKA 2025.04.29 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRA-S-491-2025 3 confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. Further the appellant is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the appellant; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 6. The petition stands allowed. 7. It is made clear that anything contained hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 28.04.2025 kanika i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.04.29 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment