Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60710 (PNJ)

KAMLESH RANI AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/28380/2025 · 2025-05-27

Mahabir Singh Sindhu

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-28380-2025 (O&M) 216 (3) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28380-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.05.2025 Kamlesh Rani and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present:- Mr. Shubhashish Kukreti, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, AAG, Punjab for the respondent. Mr. Deepak Verma, Advocate for the complainant. ****** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in FIR No.07 dated 18.01.2025 (P-1) and GDD No. 12 dated 19.01.2025 (P-2), under Sections 191(3), 132, 221 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Garhshankar, District Hoshiapur. (2) Allegations are that petitioners along with co-accused formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object obstructed the de facto-complainant as well as police party from discharging their official duties. -1- HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.28 19:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28380-2025 (O&M) (3) Contends that petitioners were granted interim protection by this Court, vide order dated 22.05.2025 and in pursuance thereof, they have already joined the investigation; hence, their custodial interrogation is not required. (4) The above factual position is not disputed by learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI-Rajesh Kumar and submits that as on today, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. (5) Learned Counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer of petitioners. (6) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. (7) It transpires that petitioners were granted interim protection by this Court, vide order dated 22.05.2025 and the order reads as under:- “ Contends, inter alia, that co-accused with similar allegations have already been granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 28.03.2025 and 20.05.2025 passed in CRM-M-17174-2025 and CRM-M-27894-2025, respectively. Notice of motion. Ms. Manjot Kaur, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and seeks time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. Posted for 27.05.2025. In the meanwhile, petitioners shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer; but they be not arrested till the next date of hearing. To be heard along with CRM-M-17174-2025.” -2- HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.28 19:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28380-2025 (O&M) (8) It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioners have joined investigation and their custodial interrogation is not required. (9) Although, learned Counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer; but since learned State Counsel is not asking for the custodial interrogation of petitioners; hence, the objection raised on behalf of de facto complainant is hereby rejected. (10) In view of the above, there is no justification to deny concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 22.05.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (11) It is also made clear that petitioners shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation. (12) The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter. (13) It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioners, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 27.05.2025 ( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU ) Harish Kumar JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No -3- HARISH KUMAR 2025.05.28 19:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document