IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27327-2025 Date of decision: 27.05.2025 ASHANDEEP SINGH ….PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Mikhail Kad, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab. **** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR as under: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 154 28.11.2023 279, 323, 324, 483, 506, 326, 120-B, 34 of IPC Sadar Sangrur, District Sangrur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the order dated 19.05.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already joined the investigation and as such prayed for confirming the interim bail granted vide order dated 19.05.2025. 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Hakam Singh, intimates the Court that the petitioner has joined investigation and is neither required for further investigation nor for any custodial interrogation. 4. During the course of hearing on 19.05.2025, following order KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-27327-2025 2 was passed: “ 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Even as per the allegations, he is alleged to be the driver of the car and no specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner. He submits that, even otherwise, with the intervention of respectables, compromise has been effected between the parties and Complainant Rakesh Kumar has given sworn affidavit dated 14.05.2025, copy of which is annexed on the file. On the basis whereof, quashing of FIR has been sought. He submits that even a petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of said compromise has already been filed which is pending vide CRM-M-19961-2025 for 21.05.2025 and the petitioner is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to join the investigation. Hence, the present petition. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has not disputed the factual matrix. 5. Mr. Ashdeep Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of complainant and filed power of attorney, which is taken on record. He admitted the factum of compromise and affidavit (Annexure P-4) given voluntarily by the complainant-victim. He submits that he has specific instructions from the victim-complainant to say that he has no objection in grant of bail to the petitioner. 6. Be it the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation within 4 days from today and in the event of his arrest, he is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-27327-2025 3 personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. 7. Investigating Officer of the case to remain present along with record on the next date of hearing. 8. List on 27.05.2025.” 5. Keeping in view the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petitioner had joined the investigation consequent to the order dated 19.05.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 19.05.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. Further the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 6. The petition stands allowed. 7. It is made clear that anything contained hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 27.05.2025 (SANJIV BERRY) kanika JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.05.28 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment