CRM-M-50513 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (104) Kulvir Singh State of Punjab. CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. BNSS, 2023, praying FIR No. 69 dated 26.08.2025, registered under Sections 74, 75, and 79 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station City Kurali, District SAS Nagar, Punjab. 2. the allegations levelled in FIR are wholly and that no such incident residence of the petitioner’s brother of the co responsibility of maintaining and looking after the premises has been entrusted to the petitioner. It is further submitted that, in neighbourhood relation, the keys of the aforesaid h complainant’s family for convenience and on the day of incident, the 50513-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Kulvir Singh Versus State of Punjab. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mrs. R.K. Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 69 dated 26.08.2025, registered under Sections 74, 75, and 79 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station City Kurali, District SAS Nagar, Punjab. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently allegations levelled in FIR are wholly and that no such incident as narrated ever took place. It is submitted that the of the petitioner’s brother-in-law is located opposite the of the complainant. Since the brother responsibility of maintaining and looking after the premises has been to the petitioner. It is further submitted that, in neighbourhood relation, the keys of the aforesaid h complainant’s family for convenience and on the day of incident, the -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-50513-2025 Date of Decision:- 09.09.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Mrs. R.K. Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 69 dated 26.08.2025, registered under Sections 74, 75, and 79 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station City Kurali, District SAS Nagar, Punjab. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that false, fabricated and concocted took place. It is submitted that the law is located opposite the residence e brother-in-law resides abroad the responsibility of maintaining and looking after the premises has been to the petitioner. It is further submitted that, in spite of cordial neighbourhood relation, the keys of the aforesaid house were retained by complainant’s family for convenience and on the day of incident, the - 09.09.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 69 dated 26.08.2025, registered under Sections 74, 75, and 79 of argued that false, fabricated and concocted took place. It is submitted that the residence the responsibility of maintaining and looking after the premises has been of cordial ouse were retained by complainant’s family for convenience and on the day of incident, the MANJU 2025.09.11 17:03 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-50513 petitioner had merely approached the complainant’s house to collect the keys of said premises. Beyond this limited interaction, there was no occurrence of any 3. highly improbable that such an incident could have occurred, especially in the presence of the complainant’s grandfather and other relatives in t house. Moreover, the complainant, being a mature hue and cry at the time of the alleged incident. Counsel also points out there is an unexplained delay of four days in lodging the FIR and, therefore, prays for the grant of 4. submits that the petitioner is have been levelled against him. The matter is investigation and it is POCSO Act upon the complainant’s concession of anticipatory bai hamper the the part of the law enforcement machinery 5. Hon’ble Apex Court in cas [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10499 of 2023] allegations are made against a police officer machinery of law enforcement 50513-2025 petitioner had merely approached the complainant’s house to collect the of said premises. Beyond this limited interaction, there was no occurrence of any untoward incident as alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that it is highly improbable that such an incident could have occurred, especially in the presence of the complainant’s grandfather and other relatives in t house. Moreover, the complainant, being a mature hue and cry at the time of the alleged incident. Counsel also points out an unexplained delay of four days in lodging the FIR and, therefore, prays for the grant of anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the petitioner is himself a police official and serious allegation have been levelled against him. The matter is investigation and it is also under examination POCSO Act are attracted since FIR contains allegation the complainant’s minor child. It is urged that of anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would hamper the ongoing investigation, especially the part of the law enforcement machinery. Learned State counsel further relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case The State of Jharkhand vs. Sandeep Kumar [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10499 of 2023] allegations are made against a police officer machinery of law enforcement, the High Court ought not to -2- petitioner had merely approached the complainant’s house to collect the of said premises. Beyond this limited interaction, there was no ard incident as alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that it is highly improbable that such an incident could have occurred, especially in the presence of the complainant’s grandfather and other relatives in the house. Moreover, the complainant, being a mature woman, did not raise any hue and cry at the time of the alleged incident. Counsel also points out that an unexplained delay of four days in lodging the FIR and, therefore, Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the petition and police official and serious allegation have been levelled against him. The matter is still at a nascent stage of also under examination whether the provisions of the since FIR contains allegations of sexual assault It is urged that granting any to the petitioner at this stage would seriously investigation, especially when the petitioner himself is Learned State counsel further relied upon the judgment of The State of Jharkhand vs. Sandeep Kumar [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10499 of 2023], wherein it has held that, allegations are made against a police officer, who is an essential cog in the the High Court ought not to take a liberal - petitioner had merely approached the complainant’s house to collect the of said premises. Beyond this limited interaction, there was no It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that it is highly improbable that such an incident could have occurred, especially in he woman, did not raise any that an unexplained delay of four days in lodging the FIR and, therefore, opposed the petition and police official and serious allegation stage of whether the provisions of the s of sexual assault granting any seriously petitioner himself is Learned State counsel further relied upon the judgment of The State of Jharkhand vs. Sandeep Kumar wherein it has held that, an essential cog in the take a liberal MANJU 2025.09.11 17:03 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-50513 view merely for the asking. 6. principle of law Vinod Vs. State of Haryana in CRM 09.04.2024, wherein it was held that the parameters of granting anticipatory bail to a police officer, especially an Investigating Officer, are stricter compared to those applicable to a layperson due to the fiduciary duty of the officer to conduct a fair invest 7. peace and harmony in society and when serious allegations are levelled against such an officer, they must be examined with responsibility. 8. allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, who happens to be a police official, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for granting the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. petition is dismissed. September 09, 2025 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: 50513-2025 view merely for the asking. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. principle of law and this Court on an earlier occasion also held in case titled Vinod Vs. State of Haryana in CRM , wherein it was held that the parameters of granting anticipatory bail to a police officer, especially an Investigating Officer, are stricter compared to those applicable to a layperson due to the fiduciary duty of the officer to conduct a fair investigation. However, a police official has a bounden duty to maintain peace and harmony in society and when serious allegations are levelled against such an officer, they must be examined with responsibility. Considering the above factual matrix, where serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, who happens to be a police official, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for granting the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. petition is dismissed. September 09, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -3- Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. It is a settled and this Court on an earlier occasion also held in case titled Vinod Vs. State of Haryana in CRM-M-17599-2024 decided on , wherein it was held that the parameters of granting anticipatory bail to a police officer, especially an Investigating Officer, are stricter compared to those applicable to a layperson due to the fiduciary duty of the police official has a bounden duty to maintain peace and harmony in society and when serious allegations are levelled against such an officer, they must be examined with greater seriousness and above factual matrix, where serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, who happens to be a police official, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for granting the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE - It is a settled and this Court on an earlier occasion also held in case titled 2024 decided on , wherein it was held that the parameters of granting anticipatory bail to a police officer, especially an Investigating Officer, are stricter compared to those applicable to a layperson due to the fiduciary duty of the police official has a bounden duty to maintain peace and harmony in society and when serious allegations are levelled greater seriousness and above factual matrix, where serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, who happens to be a police official, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for granting the resent MANJU 2025.09.11 17:03 I agree to specified portions of this document