CRM-M No.12139 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 ***** CRM-M No.12139 of 2026 Date of decision : 6.4.2026 Date of uploading : 6.4.2026 Ramandeep Singh @ Ramandeep Dass ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Ankit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab Mr. Davinder Singh Saini, Advocate, for the complainant --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. On 6.3.2026, the following order was passed: ‘Inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, the petitioner was earlier extended the concession of interim anticipatory bail by the concerned Sessions Court, but he same was later on came to be declined for the cause that the petitioner had not cooperated and the stolen articles have not been recovered, & the petitioner is willing to join investigation and cooperate therein. Notice of motion. On the strength of advance service of copy of petition; Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG Punjab causes appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent- State of Punjab. Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the complainant. Put up on 06.04.2026. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 10.03.2026 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when further called by Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the condition(s) ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.04.06 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.12139 of 2026 -2- enumerated under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.’ 2. Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 6.3.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation but his custodial interrogation is required for recovering the stolen articles. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, especially keeping in view the factum that the petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is sought only for recovery of the stolen articles in question; this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 6.3.2026. 4. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. The interim order dated 6.3.2026, passed by this Court is hereby confirmed, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 5. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 6. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause. 7. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 6.4.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.04.06 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document