CRM-M-10461-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217/2 CRM-M-10461-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.04.2025 Vimal Kumar .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Chahal, AAG, Punjab. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU , J. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No.40 dated 03.05.2024 (P-1), under Sections 177, 420, 465, 466, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Phase-8, SAS Nagar. 2. Allegations are that petitioner in connivance with co-accused got prepared fake and fraud documents in order to get registration certificate of BAMS for co-accused-Harpreet Kaur. 3. Contends that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 and in pursuance thereof, he has already joined investigation; hence, his custodial interrogation is not required. 4. The above factual position is not disputed by learned State Counsel, on instructions from quarter concerned and submits that his custodial interrogation is not required. Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10461-2025 2 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. 6. It transpires that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 and the order reads as under:- “Contends, inter alia, that FIR has been registered after unexplained delay of 2 years and co-accused Khushwant Rai has been granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2025 in CRM-M-9135- 2025. Notice of motion. Ms.Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State; seek time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. Posted for 03.04.2025. To be heard alongwith CRM-M-9135-2025. In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer; but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing.” 7. It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 8. In view of the above, there is no justification to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 24.02.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 9. It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation. 10. The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter. 11. It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order. Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10461-2025 3 Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 03.04.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document