225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA SONIA AND ANOTHER STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Instant petition is preferred under Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.244 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Tripari, Patiala. 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH SONIA AND ANOTHER V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Nitish Garg, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) Instant petition is preferred under Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.244 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), ed at Police Station Tripari, Patiala. On 28.04.2025, following order was passed: “Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.244 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Tripari, Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that as per the allegations made b complainant, petitioner No.1 entered her matrimonial house, as such, no offence under Section 331(6) of BNS is made out and and all other offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, are bailable in nature. Further, petitioner No.1 and her wh IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22140-2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 ...PETITIONERS ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.244 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), , following order was passed: Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.244 dated under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Tripari, Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends that as per the allegations made by the complainant, petitioner No.1 entered her matrimonial house, as such, no offence under Section 331(6) of BNS is made out and and all other offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, are bailable in nature. Further, petitioner No.1 and her whole family members have been MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-22140 3. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated petitioners have custodial interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned 22140-2025 2 falsely implicated in the present case due to matrimonial dispute between petitioner No.1 and her husband. Notice of motion for 23.05.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satende (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the pe admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioners will cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioners to join the investigation, they would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioners in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the cas accordance with law.” Learned State counsel, on instructions from submits that in compliance of order dated 28.04.2025 s have joined the investigation and interrogation. Keeping in view the statement made by learned falsely implicated in the present case due to matrimonial dispute between petitioner No.1 and her husband. Notice of motion for 23.05.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC ggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) petitioners are directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioners will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioners will cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioners to join the investigation, they would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioners in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in on instructions from ASI Charanjit Singh, 28.04.2025 passed by this Court, the and are not required for further Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-22140 the order dated 28.04.2025 the 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 construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to p accordance with law. May 23, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 22140-2025 3 the order dated 28.04.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner the terms and conditions enumerated in Section Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) 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 accordance with law. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable , is made absolute. The petitioners shall abide by 482(2) 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 roceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment