210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA MANISH TYAGI STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Mr. Didar Singh, Advocate; Mr. Medhya Ahluwalia, Advocate and Mr. Apurv Parashari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for the complainant. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory in FIR No.17 dated 22.01.2025 under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MANISH TYAGI @ MANISH KUMAR V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate; Mr. Didar Singh, Advocate; Mr. Medhya Ahluwalia, Advocate and Mr. Apurv Parashari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for the complainant. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory in FIR No.17 dated 22.01.2025 under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. On 08.05.2025, 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.17 dated 22.01.2025 under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that there is no evidence to remotely prove the complicity of the petitioner. Admittedly, the warehouse in question was taken on rent by co IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25185-2025 Date of decision: 28.05.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Medhya Ahluwalia, Advocate and andeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for the complainant. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.17 dated 22.01.2025 under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. , following order was passed: Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of arik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.17 dated 22.01.2025 under Section 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that there is no evidence to remotely prove the complicity of the petitioner. Admittedly, the warehouse in question was taken on rent by co-accused Aakash Sharma. MANISHA 2025.05.28 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-25185 25185-2025 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner r (Annexure P-5 & P-15), perusal of which clearly indicates that the complainant has acknowledged that they have completed the formalities of handing over and taking over of the material. Further, the petitioner was only acting as representative of the complainant into the shoes of co completing the pending work after he left the company in the year 2022. Further, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is r punishable upto 07 years and no notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41 Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’)] has been served upon the petitioner. Notice of motion for 28.05.2025. 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 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as di Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the invest abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon emails 15), perusal of which clearly indicates that the complainant has acknowledged that they have completed the formalities of handing over and taking over of the material. Further, the petitioner was only acting as ative of the complainant-company and he stepped into the shoes of co-accused Aakash Sharma for completing the pending work after he left the company in the year 2022. Further, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 07 years and no notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’)] has been served upon the petitioner. Notice of motion for 28.05.2025. w 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) C 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is 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 petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as MANISHA 2025.05.28 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-25185 3. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated petitioner has joined interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned the order dated 08.05.2025 terms and conditions enumerated i 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 proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. May 28, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 25185-2025 3 an expression of opinion by this Court and learne Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law” Learned State counsel, on instructions from submits that in compliance of order dated 08.05.2025 petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned 08.05.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions enumerated in Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 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 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 Pawan Kumar, 08.05.2025 passed by this Court, the and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, , is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the 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 trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.05.28 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment