Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89091 (PNJ)

VIKAS v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/43002/2025 · 2025-09-24

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-43002-2025 (O&M) 1 218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-43002-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:24.09.2025 Vikas ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Ms. Ramandeep Kaur Brar, Advocate for Mr. Monty Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. ***** MANISHA BATRA J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.1 dated 01.01.2025, registered under Sections 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNS and Section 118(2) of BNS added later on at Police Station Daba, District Ludhiana Police Commissionerate, Ludhaina. 2. Vide order dated 08.08.2025, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. 3. Status report/reply dated 20.09.2025 filed on behalf of the respondent-State is taken on record. Copy thereof, has been supplied to counsel opposite. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when notice of motion was issued by this Court on 08.08.2025, the petitioner was directed to join the investigation and was granted interim bail. In SHWETA 2025.09.26 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-43002-2025 (O&M) 2 pursuance thereof, he has already joined the investigation and has fully cooperated with the investigation process. Therefore, the interim bail granted to the petitioner may be made absolute 5. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 18.08.2025. He further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for the purpose of identifying other persons involved in the occurrence and for conducting further investigation. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 7. Since the petitioner has already joined the investigation and given the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the considered view that no case for further custodial interrogation is made out for the purpose of identifying the co-accused. As such, a case is made out for allowing the petition. 8. Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, and without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 08.08.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (analogous to Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure). (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE 24.09.2025 shweta Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SHWETA 2025.09.26 09:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document