CRM-M-33448-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 218 CRM-M-33448-2025 Date of decision: 09.07.2025 Harpreet Kaur ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Satnam Singh Abiana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Punjab. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1. Relief sought The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked for the second time under Section 482 BNSS seeking pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.89 dated 17.10.2024 under Sections 406,420 IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 registered at P.S Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar. 2. Contention On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties vide agreement dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P.6). Mr. Karanvir Singh, Advocate has put in appearance for the complainant and filed his Vakalatnama. He has admitted the factum of compromise having been executed between the parties and is not opposed to the concession of grant of bail to the petitioner. MANOJ KUMAR 2025.07.10 07:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order CRM-M-33448-2025 2 3. Analysis Be that as it may, in the light of the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties and compromise deed dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P.6) is annexed with the petition wherein both the parties have agreed to end the litigation, hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no more deemed necessary at this stage as nothing is to be recovered from him. 5. Relief In the light of above, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to him joining investigation with the Investigating Officer concerned within a period of one week from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to his satisfaction for the reason that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required as it would be of no fruitful purpose to put the petitioner behind the bars. 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.’ MANOJ KUMAR 2025.07.10 07:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order CRM-M-33448-2025 3 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 and comply with the aforesaid condition under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023, the order passed by this Court today shall automatically stands cancelled. In the aforesaid terms, the present petition stands allowed. ( SANDEEP MOUDGIL ) JUDGE 09.07.2025 manoj Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2025.07.10 07:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order