CRM-M-39990-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CRM-M-39990-2025 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 28.07.2025 PARMINDER SINGH ...PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. TPS Walia, Addl.A.G, Punjab. *** SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1. Prayer This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 83 dated 29.05.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 343, 61(2)(a) of the BNS, 2023 at P.S. Rampura, District Bathinda. 2. Contentions On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the allegations have been made relating to the acquisition of land made in the year 2020/2021 for the ‘Bharatmala’ road project of NHAI. He further submits that there is delay of about two and a half years in lodging the present FIR. He contends that earlier also a complaint was moved by the complainant against the present petitioner on the same set of allegations and as per the enquiry report dated 06.05.2023, no offence or criminal liability was ascertained against him. Anuradha 2025.07.28 06:08 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-39990-2025 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate with the investigating officer. Notice of motion. On behalf of the State Learned State Counsel appearing on advance notice on instructions from Investigating officer vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of concession of anticipatory bail stating that the petitioner along with other co-accused in connivance with each other have committed fraud with villagers. 3. Analysis Be that as it may, after given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions as made, by the counsel for both the parties to the effect that here is delay of about two and a half years in lodging the present FIR, as acquisition of land was done way back in the year 2021 and earlier also complaint was filed but nothing criminal liability was ascertained against him, moreover, no concrete material has been produced by the learned State Counsel to oppose the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Court finds no reason to deny the petitioner the concession of anticipatory bail, wherein the petitioner has bona fide intentions and is willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency within the stipulated time period. 4. Relief Hence, in view of the admitted set of circumstances before this Court, the petitioner is hereby directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to him joining investigation and reporting to the Anuradha 2025.07.28 06:08 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-39990-2025 3 Investigating Officer concerned within a period of one week from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS of 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 one week, the order passed by this Court today shall automatically stand cancelled. The petition in the aforesaid terms stand allowed. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE 28.07.2025 anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Anuradha 2025.07.28 06:08 I agree to specified portions of this document