CRM-M-35754-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35754-2025 Decided on: 11.08.2025 BALDEV SINGH …...Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB …...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Sukhmeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Baldev Singh 60 29.05.2025 326(a), 351(1), 303(2), 3(5) of BNS 2023, 70 of Northern India Canal and Drainage Act, 1873 Sadiq Faridkot 2. On 07.07.2025, following order was passed:- “ Contends, inter alia, that co-accused Satpal Singh and Joginder Singh with similar allegations have already been granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 (P-3) and 07.07.2025 (P-4) respectively. Notice of motion. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent; seeks time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. Posted for 11.08.2025. PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.08.12 20:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement CRM-M-35754-2025 2 In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer; but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing. To be heard alongwith CRM-M-34216-2025.” 3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 10.07.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order. He further contends that the petitioner is not attributed with injury falling under Section 118(2) of BNS [erstwhile Section 326 of IPC]. 4. Learned State counsel on instructions from I.O. confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 21.07.2025 by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 10.07.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 7. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 11.08.2025 Chiranjeev Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.08.12 20:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement