CRM-M-25205-2025 -1- 223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25205-2025 Date of Decision:17.07.2025 Raj Lal Patel alias Rajlal Patel …Petitioner vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. G.S.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. *** 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.56, dated 30.03.2025, under Section 306 of BNS, 2023 (offence under Section 317(2) of BNS added subsequently during investigation), registered at Police Station Division No.6, District Ludhiana. (Annexure P-1). 2. While granting the concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 12.05.2025, this Court had noticed the following contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the present petitioner has not been named in the present FIR and has been arrayed as an accused in the present case on the basis of a disclosure statement suffered by co-accused. Ever as per the FIR, Arjun and Rakesh Kumar, both workers of the complainant, used to commit the theft of steel from the factory of the complainant and used to sell it to Hari Ram, co-accused. Arjun, Rakesh Kumar and Hari Ram were arrested in the present case and during the course HEMLATA 2025.07.18 02:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25205-2025 -2- of investigation, Hari Ram suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he used to sell stolen iron scrap to the petitioner and the petitioner was also nominated as an accused. Learned counsel next submits that Arjun, Rakesh Kumar and Hari Ram have already been granted the concession of regular bail by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana vide order (Annexure P- 3).” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions and submitted 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 12.05.2025 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. 6. Pending application(s) stand(s) also disposed of. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 17.07.2025 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2025.07.18 02:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document