CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 211 CRM-M-14114-2025 Manpreet …...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …...Respondent 211-2 CRM-M-23346-2025 Nardeep @ Deepu …...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …...Respondent Decided on: 20.05.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Naresh Kumar Khepar, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in both cases) Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. The aforementioned petitions are being disposed of by way of a common order, as they arise out of the same FIR. 2. The present petitions have been filed by Manpreet (petitioner in CRM-M-14114-2025) and Nardeep @ Deepu(petitioner in CRM-M-23346-2025) under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.55 dated 13.04.2022, under Sections 379-B IPC (Section 34/411 of IPC was added later on), registered at Police Station Jodhewal, District Ludhiana. RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 2 3. When CRM-M-14114-2025, filed by petitioner-Manpreet came up for consideration before this Court on 17.03.2025, the following order was passed: “1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Manpreet aged about 29 years 55 13.04.2022 379-B of IPC (Sections 34/411 of IPC added later on) Jodhewal Ludhiana 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that:- (i) By concocting a false version, petitioner – Manpreet, along with other accused, has been involved in this case; (ii) Without there being any recovery or even, moving of complaint by the real victim, FIR under Section 379-B of the IPC has been registered at the first instance, only, on the pretext of receiving secret information, for making the offence graver and punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years’ period; (iii) Registration of the FIR under Section 379-B of IPC, prior to the petitioner’s arrest or the receipt of the actual complaint, appears to be solely for the purpose of making improvements in the case, as per the whims of the police officials. (iv) Even if the allegations are taken to be true, at best, prosecution can allege the involvement of the petitioner for committing of offence under Section 411 of IPC, which does not require the act of stealing or snatching of the articles; Moreover, by the time of registration of FIR under Section 379-B of IPC, admittedly, no such complaint was received by the police from the real victim. 3. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On advance notice, Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent – State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter. 6. Adjourned to 20.05.2025. 7. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 3 satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 8. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.” 4. Subsequently, CRM-M-23346-2025, filed by co-accused, namely Nardeep @ Deepu, was listed for hearing on 01.05.2025. While granting the concession of ad-interim bail, this Court passed the following order: “1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Nardeep @ Deepu aged about 32 years 55 13.04.2022 379-B IPC(Sectio ns 34/411 of IPC added later on) Jodhewal Ludhiana 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that:- (i) By concocting a false version, petitioner, along with other accused, has been involved in this case; (ii) Without there being any recovery or even, moving of complaint by the real victim, FIR under Section 379-B of the IPC has been registered at the first instance, only, on the pretext of receiving secret information, for making the offence graver and punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years’ period; (iii) Registration of the FIR under Section 379-B of IPC, prior to the petitioner’s arrest or the receipt of the actual complaint, appears to be solely for the purpose of making improvements in the case, as per the whims of the police officials. (iv) Even if the allegations are taken to be true, at best, prosecution can allege the involvement of the petitioner for committing of RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 4 offence under Section 411 of IPC, whichdoes not require the act of stealing or snatching of the articles; Moreover, by the time of registration of FIR under Section 379-B of IPC, admittedly, no such complaint was received by the police from the real victim. (v) Co-accused, namely, Manpreet, who is real brother of the petitioner, has also been involved in the aforementioned false case, and on filing of anticipatory bail petition No.CRM-M-14114-2025, vide order dated 17.03.2025, interim bail has already been granted to him, and the same is fixed for 20.05.2025. 3. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On advance notice, Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Senior DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent – State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter. 6. Adjourned to 20.05.2025. To be heard along with CRM-M-14114-2025. 7. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 8. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in compliance of orders dated 17.03.2025 and 01.05.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioners have joined the investigation, and have fully co- operated. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not warranted. In view of the petitioners cooperation and the nature of evidence involved, it is prayed that the interim protection granted earlier be confirmed and the petitions for anticipatory bail be allowed. RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 5 6. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that, as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. However, it is submitted that the petitioners be directed to rejoin the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. It is further clarified that in the event of non-cooperation or failure to join the investigation when called upon, the petitioners shall not be entitled to claim the benefit of anticipatory bail. 7. After going through the paper-book and hearing learned State counsel, and upon perusal of the allegations levelled in the FIR as well as the issues highlighted during the course of hearing, and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have joined the investigation and have extended full cooperation, and that custodial interrogation is not required as of now, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petitions. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim orders dated 17.03.2025 and 01.05.2025 are hereby made absolute. Petitions thus, allowed. 8. However, the petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer and shall abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS, 2023). It is further clarified that in the event the petitioners fails to join or rejoin the investigation despite service of due notice by the Investigating Officer, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the anticipatory bail. RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-14114-2025 and CRM-M-23346-2025 6 Besides, it is directed that petitioners would hand over their passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if they possess. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they do not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioners would seek prior permission of the Court. 9. Accordingly, petitions stand disposed of. 10. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of another connected case. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE May 20, 2025 rashmi Whether Speaking/Reasoned:YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RASHMI 2025.05.20 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document