276 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.23908 of 2026 Date of decision: 22.05.2026 Kuldeep Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present :- Mr. Dilpreet Singh Gandhi, Advocate and Mr. Sagar Bathla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Surinderjit S. Nahar, AAG, Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. K.D.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant. ***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1. This is the first petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.101 dated 14.04.2026, registered under Sections 306 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 381 and 420 IPC, 1860), at Police Station Gate Hakima, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar. 2. Brief facts of the present case are that the FIR in question came to be registered on the basis of an application moved by the complainant, namely Captain Channan Singh Sidhu, owner of Sandeep Gas NEETU RANI 2026.05.22 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD CRM-M No.23908 of 2026 -2- Service, City Centre, Amritsar, alleging shortage of LPG cylinders from his godown situated at Annagarh Gate Hakima, Amritsar. As per the allegations, the petitioner had been working as the godown in-charge for approximately ten years prior to registration of the present FIR. It has been alleged that during periodic physical verification of stock conducted on 30.12.2025, no discrepancy was found; however, during a subsequent verification carried out on 20.03.2026, shortage of LPG cylinders of different capacities, i.e 14.2 kg, 19 kg and 5 kg cylinders was detected. On the basis of the said shortage, allegations have been levelled that the petitioner, in connivance with certain other persons, had misappropriated and sold the aforesaid cylinders during the intervening period, which led to registration of the present FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case owing to political rivalry, as he is an elected Councillor of the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar belonging to the Congress party and was allegedly being pressurized to join the ruling party. It is further argued that after suffering an accident on 25.02.2026 and consequent hospitalization, the petitioner had handed over charge of the godown to Satnam Singh @ Satta and Nirmal Singh @ Nimma and, therefore, had no effective control over the godown during the relevant period when the alleged shortage occurred. Learned counsel also submits that an undertaking/settlement dated 31.03.2026, whereby the petitioner allegedly assumed liability for the shortage amounting to Rs.13,57,600/-, was obtained under coercion, undue pressure and while he was in a vulnerable medical condition. It is further contended that the NEETU RANI 2026.05.22 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD CRM-M No.23908 of 2026 -3- petitioner immediately submitted a complaint dated 02.04.2026 to the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar, disclosing the true facts and naming the persons who were actually entrusted with stock handling. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has maintained proper stock records, has joined the investigation, and that approximately 531 cylinders are still outstanding with delivery personnel in the ordinary course of business, thereby indicating that the alleged shortage has been wrongly attributed to him. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, opposes the present petition for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned State counsel submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature, as he had allegedly misappropriated/stolen a large number of LPG cylinders from the godown of the complainant, who is running Bharat Petroleum Gas Agency under the name and style of Sandeep Gas Service. It is further argued that the petitioner had admitted his liability by executing a written undertaking on his letterhead, wherein he agreed to repay the value of the missing gas cylinders. However, neither has he paid the said amount to the complainant nor have the gas cylinders allegedly sold by him to other persons been recovered till date. It is thus contended that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for effecting recovery and unearthing the complete modus operandi, and therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper-book with their able assistance. NEETU RANI 2026.05.22 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD CRM-M No.23908 of 2026 -4- 6. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature, as he is accused of misappropriating a large number of LPG cylinders from the godown of the complainant and causing a loss to the tune of Rs.13,57,600/-. It is not denied by the petitioner that he had executed an undertaking admitting liability and agreeing to repay the value of the missing cylinders. Though the stand of the petitioner is that the said undertaking was obtained under pressure and coercion, the veracity of such plea is a matter of evidence, which cannot be gone into at this stage while considering the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is also an admitted position that despite execution of the said undertaking, the petitioner has not repaid the amount to the complainant. The allegations further indicate that the cylinders were allegedly sold to other persons and recovery of the same is yet to be effected. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for effective investigation, recovery of the case property and to unearth the complete modus operandi. 7. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed. 8. However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 9. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 22.05.2026 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No NEETU RANI 2026.05.22 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD