CRM-M-44394-2025 -1- 111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44394-2025 DECIDED ON: 18.08.2025 AKASHDEEP SINGH @ AKASH .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Akash Manocha, Advocate for the petitioner. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1. Prayer The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 110 dated 08.10.2024, registered under Sections 109, 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanita, 2023 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P-1) 2 Contention On behalf of the petitioner At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties on the basis of compromise dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure P-2), with the intervention of the respectable of the society. MEENU 2025.08.18 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44394-2025 -2- Notice of motion. On behalf of the State/complainant On the asking of Court, Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State. He submits that in the light of compromise entered between the parties, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Mr. Vishawjeet Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of complainant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. He endorsed no objection, in case the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail. 3. Analysis Be that as it may, having given due consideration to the submissions advanced, particularly to the fact that the matter has been settled between the parties on the basis of compromise dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure P-2), custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. In the light of above, this Court is of the considered view that there is no valid or cogent reason to deny the bail to the present petitioner, wherein he has bona fide intentions and is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency in time. 4. Relief:- Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation with the Investigating Officer concerned within a period of one week from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, which are reproduced below:- MEENU 2025.08.18 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44394-2025 -3- ‘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) 18.08.2025 JUDGE Meenu Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No MEENU 2025.08.18 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document