CRM-M-18909-2025 -1- 207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18909-2025 Date of Decision10.07.2025 Toni …Petitioner vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Maninder Singh Saini, Advocate for the complainant. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of B.N.S.S with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.30, dated 27.02.2025, under Sections 115(2),118(1),191(3),190,324,351(2), 351(3) of B.N.S and Section 118(2) of BNS added later on, registered at Police Station Satnam Pura Phagwara, District Kaputhala (Annexure P-1). 2. While granting the concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 05.04.2025, this Court had noticed the following contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a matrimonial dispute is pending between Vandana, sister of the petitioner and his brother-in-law Baljinder Dass (complainant). He further contends that a complaint dated 09.10.2024 was already filed by sister of the petitioner against the present complainant and it was pending for enquiry. Learned counsel further contends that in fact, the occurrence had not taken place in the manner, as suggested by the HEMLATA 2025.07.10 22:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18909-2025 -2- complainant of the present case. In reality, the complainant and his unknown accomplices had attacked the petitioner and caused injuries to him. However, by colluding with the local police, the complainant managed to get the present FIR registered against the present petitioner and others. Learned counsel further contends that in fact, the present petitioner had also suffered serious injuries on his person and despite MLR, a cross version in the shape of DDR No.22, dated 06.03.2025, under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3) of B.N.S was also registered against Baljinder Dass, complainant and his accomplices. He further contends that a series of litigation is pending between the complainant and Vandana, sis- ter of the petitioner before different Courts and the FIR has been registered by the complainant, just to victimise the petitioner and his sister.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions and further submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation may not be required. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel also submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation. 5. In view of the above statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the interim order dated 05.04.2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 10.07.2025 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2025.07.10 22:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document