CRM-M-22668-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 CRM-M-22668-2025 Decided on:- 01.07.2025 Manju and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Sandeep Godara, Advocate for Mr. APS Rehan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the complainant. * * * * * AMARJOT BHATTI, J.(Oral) 1. Petitioners Manju and Janak Raj have filed petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 14 dated 27.03.2025 under Section 137(2) and 87 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 61(2) of BNS added subsequently) registered at Police Station Ghuman Kalan, District Gurdaspur. 2. As per the facts of case, present FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant ‘KK’, where she alleged that her daughter ‘LK’ i.e. victim age 17 years student of 11th class left the house for school on 20.03.2025 in morning to appear in examination but did not return home. Complainant alongwith her family members tried to search her at her own level but could not locate her. Thereafter, she came to know that Yugraj Pal LALIT SHARMA 2025.07.02 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22668-2025 -2- @ Joga has enticed away her daughter. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners argued that petitioner No. 1 Manju is mother and petitioner No. 2 Janak Raj is father of Yugraj Pal @ Joga, who is about 19½ years old. They were not aware of said relationship of their son with victim. This fact came to their knowledge when their son did not return home. They had no role to play in said occurrence. They are ready to join investigation. 4. Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State assisted by learned counsel for complainant. Status report has been filed. It is pointed out that said victim was minor. Till date neither victim could be recovered nor main accused could be arrested. Main accused could have not taken away the victim without the help and financial aid by his parents. Therefore, petitioners are not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. 5. I have considered the aforesaid factual position and have gone through the record. Facts of case indicate that victim left the house without telling anybody and Yugraj Pal @ Joga has been named as accused who allured the victim to leave the house. Present petitioners are parents of said boy. Investigating Agency could not arrest accused nor could recover victim till date. Matter is under investigation. So far as present petitioners are concerned, they are parents of Yugraj Pal @ Joga. They are ready to join investigation. No purpose would be served by sending them behind the bars. Therefore, anticipatory bail petition filed by petitioners Manju and Janak Raj is allowed. They be not arrested. In case of their arrest, they be released on bail to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer LALIT SHARMA concerned, subject to condition that petitioners will join investigation as 2025.07.02 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22668-2025 -3- and when required. They will not tamper with or interfere with investigation and will not leave country without prior permission as provided under Section 482(2) BNSS. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. 01.07.2025 (AMARJOT BHATTI) lalit JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No LALIT SHARMA 2025.07.02 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document