IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 208 TARLOCHAN SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. Present : Mr Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab MANISHA BATRA 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 126, dated 17.11.2024, under Sections 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section 303(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short Mehraban, Distr 2. Vide order dated 25.04.2025, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. 3. Reply dated 16.05.2025 filed on behalf of respondent taken on record. 4. Learned State co Officer, has submitted that that though the petitioner has joined investigation on 07.05.2025 but his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of ascertaining as to how much illegal mining has been the modus operandi to commit the crime and for persons/officials of mining department if any, involved in illegal mining. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: TARLOCHAN SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. G.S. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 126, dated 17.11.2024, under Sections 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short Mehraban, District Ludhiana. Vide order dated 25.04.2025, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. Reply dated 16.05.2025 filed on behalf of respondent taken on record. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that that though the petitioner has joined investigation on 07.05.2025 but his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of ascertaining as to how much illegal mining has been us operandi to commit the crime and for persons/officials of mining department if any, involved in illegal mining. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.21718 of 2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondent MANISHA BATRA , Advocate for the petitioner. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 126, dated 17.11.2024, under Sections 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short-‘BNS’), at Police Station Vide order dated 25.04.2025, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. Reply dated 16.05.2025 filed on behalf of respondent-Stae is unsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that that though the petitioner has joined investigation on 07.05.2025 but his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of ascertaining as to how much illegal mining has been done by him, to unravel us operandi to commit the crime and for identification of other persons/officials of mining department if any, involved in illegal mining. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 126, dated 17.11.2024, under Sections 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section , at Police Station Vide order dated 25.04.2025, passed by this Court, the petitioner Stae is unsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that that though the petitioner has joined investigation on 07.05.2025 but his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of done by him, to unravel identification of other Jyoti 2025.05.25 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4. This Court cannot justify the denial for pre accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, the involvement of the other accused persons, their modus operandi and concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present pe the order dated 25.04.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to grant of anticipatory bail. 23.05.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.21718 of 2025 This Court cannot justify the denial for pre hile joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, the involvement of the other accused persons, their modus operandi and to ascertain certain others facts, are concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present pe the order dated 25.04.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made subject to compliance of usual terms and conditions requisite for grant of anticipatory bail. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No M No.21718 of 2025 -2- This Court cannot justify the denial for pre-arrest bail since, an hile joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, the involvement of the other accused to ascertain certain others facts, are concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 25.04.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made compliance of usual terms and conditions requisite for (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No arrest bail since, an hile joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, the involvement of the other accused to ascertain certain others facts, are concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the pre trial incarceration of tition is allowed and the order dated 25.04.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made compliance of usual terms and conditions requisite for Jyoti 2025.05.25 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document