215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25827-2025 Date of decision: 14.07.2025 Sukhwinder Pal ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Harnoor Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.80 dated 16.04.2025 under Sections 316(2)/61(2) of BNS (wrongly mentioned as BNSS) registered at Police Station Sangrur, District Sangrur (Annexure P-1). On 13.05.2025, the 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.80 dated 16.04.2025 under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) (wrongly mentioned as BNSS), registered at Police Station City Sangrur, District Sangrur. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. The petitioner entered into an agreement to sell with the original owner, on the basis of same, he get into the agreement to sell with Jasvir Singh and Iqbal Singh. The petitioner never claimed himself to be owner of the land. Further, the civil dispute has been converted into a criminal case. Further, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 07 years. The petitioner is having clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case. Notice of motion for 14.07.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; SiddharamSatlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Neha 2025.07.15 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25827-2025 -2- 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 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 Officerand abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). 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 an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to move an appropriate application for amending the head note and prayer clause of the present petition by adding the provisions of BNS instead of BNSS.’ Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Sukhjinder Singh, at the very outset informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 13.05.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). The petition stands disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 14.07.2025 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Neha 2025.07.15 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document