IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Sr. No.: 104 Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-26904 of 2025 Date of Decision: May 16, 2025 Karan @ Karanvir Singh ..... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & another ..... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL PRESENT: - Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jastej Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. K.S. Lakhanpal, Advocate, for respondent No.2- complainant. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (Oral) 1. Relief Sought This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.100 dated 27.05.2023 under Sections 323, 394, 379-B, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station, Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala. 2. Prosecution story setup in the present case as per the version in the FIR is as under: “Statement of Baljinder Singh s/o Harbans Singh r/o village Kalewal (Khokhar Jadid), PS Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala, aged about 28 years, M.No.98149-46440, stated that I am a resident of abovementioned address and I am bus conductor in New Punjab Bus Service which plies from Sultanpur Lodhi to Anandpur Sahib.Anmolpreet Singh s/o Rajinder Singh r/o Village Pamman,PS Talwandi Chaudhrian, Distt. Kapurthala is my helper. On 27.5.2023, I alongwith Anmolpreet Singh was going from my village to bus stand Sultanpur Lodhi on my motorcycle Splendor bearing no.PB-41-7970 and which was being driven by Anmolpreet Singh and I was sitting as a pillion rider and when we crossed Talwandi bridge Sultanpur Lodhi and were going towards Civil Hospital then one motorcycle on which two youths were AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order. CRM-26904 of 025 [2] sitting, alongwith one Activa and other motorcycle on which other youths were sitting and same were 6-7 in numbers came towards us. The two youths who were sitting on the motorcycle gave kick blows upon our motorcycle and ouur motorcycle got unbalanced and then they brought their motorcycle in front of our motorcycle and pulled down the key of our motorcycle and they snatched my bag containing cash of Rs.30000. The name of the motorcycle driver was Karan son of not known, r/o Mehatpur and he was having datar in his hand. He gave a blow of dattar upon me which hit on my head and then he gave two reverse blow of dattars upon me which hit on my left elbow and back and right thigh. My companion was also given blow of reverse side of dattar by said youths and the name of his oter accomplice have come to know as Mandeep Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh r/o Ward no.5, Lohian, Distt. Jalandhar and Gurtej Singh son of Jasbir Singh r/o Village Kotha, PS Lohian, Distt. Jalandhar and Joi son of Not known r/o village Raiwal, PS Lohian, Distt. Jalandhar. They were also accompanied by 2-3 unknown persons and who were present on motorcycle and active and they were also having baseball and iron rod with them and they also gave blows of the same to me and my companion. I had taken an amount of Rs.1,60,000 as loan from Sapanmanpreet Kaur d/o Amarji Singh r/o Mahirajwala, PS Lohian, Distt. Jalandhar and same has been returned but she kept on asking me to return the money but I refused to pay her. She told me that she will teach a lesson to me. Sapanmanpreet Kaur has solemnized second marriage with Karan r/o Mehatpur Distt.Jalandhar and they in connivance with each other had attacked upon me and my friend and they have forcibly snatched money from us. Kindly take legal action them. Statement has been got recorded in the presence of Anmolpreet Singh and who has been admitted in the hospital. Statement got recorded and is correct. Sd-Baljinder Singh aforesaid sd Anmolpreet Singh attested by Lakhvir Singh ASI PS Sultanpur Lodhi dated 27.5.2023.” 3. Contentions On behalf of the petitioner At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties on the basis of compromise dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure P-3) with the intervention of the respectable of the society, the complainant does not want to pursue with the matter any further. AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order. CRM-26904 of 025 [3] Notice of motion. On behalf of the State/complainant Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant admits the factum of compromise (Annexure P-3) and also endorsed no objection, in case the present petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted on bail. Learned State counsel submits that in the light of compromise entered between the parties, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. 4. Analysis Be that as it may, having given a considerable thought to the submissions made hereinabove especially to the fact that the parties have amicably resolved the matter on the basis of compromise attached at Annexure P-3 dated 24.10.2024, this Court is of the considered view that there is no valid or cogent reason to deny the bail to the present petitioner, wherein he has bona fide intentions and is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency in time. 5. Decision Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation with the Investigating Officer concerned within a period of one week from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to his satisfaction. The petitioner shall also abide by the AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order. CRM-26904 of 025 [4] terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, which are reproduced below:- ‘When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including- (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.’ However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner does not comply with the aforesaid direction of joining the investigation within a period of one week, the order passed by this Court today shall automatically stands cancelled. In the aforesaid terms, the present petition stands allowed. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) Judge May 16, 2025 avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned: Yes/ No Whether Reportable: Yes/ No AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.