CRM-M-32830-2025 1 101 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32830-2025 Date of Decision:15.07.2025 PAWANDEEP SINGH ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. T.S. Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner. SANDEEP MOUDGIL , J. (Oral) 1. Prayer The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.94 dated 27.04.2025, under Sections 406, 420-B and 120-B of IPC registered at Police Station Civil Lines Patiala, District Patiala. 2 Co ntentions On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner and the present case has been filed by the complainant to extort money by terming the matrimonial alliance between his sister and son of the complainant as a contract marriage. Learned counsel further submits that complainant had performed the marriage of his son with the sister of the petitioner with sole intention to send his son to Canada. Notice of motion. KUMUD VERMA 2025.07.15 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32830-2025 2 On behalf of the State/ complainant On the asking of Court, Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State. Mr. A.S. Sidhu, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant. He prays for dismissal of the present petition stating that the petitioner alongwith his parents had taken huge amount of money which was transferred in their bank accounts from the complainant and his wife. Since the recovery is to be effected and investigation is in progress, therefore, learned counsel opposes the relief sought by the petitioner. 3. Analysis Be that as it may, upon due consideration of the submissions advanced and, in particular, taking note of the fact that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner, nothing is to be recovered, and he is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when directed, this Court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted at this stage. In the light of above, this Court finds no cogent or compelling reason to deny bail to the petitioner, particularly when he has expressed bona fide intent, and has undertaken to join and cooperate with the investigation so as to enable timely submission of the final report by the Investigating Agency. 4. Relief:- Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation with the Investigating Officer KUMUD VERMA 2025.07.15 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32830-2025 3 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 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 15.07.2025 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2025.07.15 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh