219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA JASMEET SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Mr. H.V. Gupta, Advocate Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. The 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case bearing FIR No.43 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development Act, 1957) and Section 379 IP Police Station Nangal Bhoor, District Pathankot (Annexure P 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH JASMEET SINGH V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. V.P.S. Mithewal, Advocate and Mr. H.V. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case bearing FIR No.43 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development Act, 1957) and Section 379 IP Police Station Nangal Bhoor, District Pathankot (Annexure P On 11.03.2025, following order was passed: “The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case bearing FIR No.43 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development Act, 1957) and Section 379 IPC registered at Police Station Nangal Bhoor, District Pathankot (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioner inter contends that similarly situated co Sandeep Singh, Pawandeep Sharma and Amandeep Sharma were granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court in cases bearing Nos. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13599-2025 Date of decision: 04.04.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR and for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case bearing FIR No.43 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development Act, 1957) and Section 379 IPC registered at Police Station Nangal Bhoor, District Pathankot (Annexure P-1). , following order was passed: The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner FIR No.43 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development Act, 1957) and Section 379 IPC registered at Police Station Nangal Bhoor, District 1). Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Sandeep Singh, Pawandeep Sharma and Amandeep Sharma were granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court in cases bearing Nos.CRM-M-9174 of 2024 MANISHA 2025.04.04 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-13599 13599-2025 2 titled as ‘Sandeep Singh vs. State of Punja 2), CRM-M-7745 of 2024 vs. State of Punjab’ (Annexure P 2024 titled as ‘Amandeep Sharma vs. State of Punjab’ (Annexure P-4) respectively. He further contends that none of the vehicles recovered during investigation, are owned by the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR (supra) and maximum sentence provided for the offences alleged to be committed in the FIR (supra), registered against the petitioner, i years. Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent In the meantime, keeping in view the law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Cou Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 352, at the first instance, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and on her doing so or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner cooperate with the Investigating/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482 (2) BNSS, 2023. If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear before the Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Investigating/Arresting Officer and direct her to join the petitioner in investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Adjourned to 04.04.2025. ‘Sandeep Singh vs. State of Punjab’ (Annexure P- 7745 of 2024 titled as ‘Pawandeep Sharma (Annexure P-3) and CRM-M-7754 of ‘Amandeep Sharma vs. State of Punjab’ respectively. He further contends that none d during investigation, are owned by the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR (supra) and maximum sentence provided for the offences alleged to be committed in the FIR (supra), registered against the petitioner, is 05 Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. In the meantime, keeping in view the law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC OnLine SC at the first instance, the petitioner is directed to Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and on her doing so or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482 (2) If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner before the Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Investigating/Arresting Officer and direct her to join the petitioner in investigation, in terms of the Adjourned to 04.04.2025. MANISHA 2025.04.04 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-13599 3. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated petitioner has joined the investigation interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned the order dated 11.03.2025 terms and conditions enumerated in Section Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 6. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. April 04, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 13599-2025 3 Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.” Learned State counsel, on instructions from submits that in compliance of order dated 11.03.2025 petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned der dated 11.03.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions enumerated in Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.) The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. (HARPREET Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in on instructions from ASI Parkash Chand, 11.03.2025 passed by this Court, the and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, , is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the 482 BNSS, 2023 (Erstwhile The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.04.04 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment