IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10886-2025 Date of decision: 19.05.2025 SALMAN KHAN ….PETITIONER Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Anshul Khurana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana. **** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR as under: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 402 20.10.2024 191 (3), 190, 115 (2), 117 (1), 109 (1), 333, 351 (3) of BNS. Sadar Nuh, District Nuh, Haryana. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the order dated 03.04.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already joined the investigation and as such prayed for confirming the interim bail granted vide order dated 03.04.2025. 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Kawal, intimates the Court that the petitioner has joined investigation and is neither required for further investigation nor for any custodial interrogation. 4. During the course of hearing on 03.04.2025 , following order KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-10886-2025 2 was passed: “ 3. It is inter alia contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He contends that no specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner and he has been falsely roped in the case due to property dispute between the parties. He contends that petitioner is ready to again join investigation. Hence prayed for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant referring to the reply submitted by the State has assailed these arguments by submitting that the petitioner had actively participated in the crime, as such, considering the nature and gravity of offence petitioner is not entitled to concession of anticipatory bail, hence prayed for dismissal of the bail petition. 5. Considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it transpires that petitioner had already joined the investigation earlier, but after addition of Section 109 (1)BNS for which the petitioner is seeking bail. Be it the case, without commenting on the merits of the case at this stage, it is deemed appropriate that petitioner should join the investigation before deciding the present petition on merits. Consequently, the petitioner 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/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. 6. Adjourned to 01.05.2025. ” KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-10886-2025 3 5. Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petitioner had joined the investigation consequent to the order dated 03.04.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 03.04.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. Further the petitioner 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 petitioner; 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. 19.05.2025 (SANJIV BERRY) kanika JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment