108 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No. M-29426 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 Paramjit Kaur ... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh. Present: Mr. Pankaj Garg, Advocate for the petitioner(s) [Through Hybrid Mode]. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent. Surya Partap Singh, J. 1. This petition for anticipatory bail is the first petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 81 dated 05.05.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section(s) 108 & 3(5) of ‘the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’, Police Station Budhlada, District Mansa, Punjab. 2. Vide order dated 21.05.2026, the petitioner was admitted to interim anticipatory bail, subject to the condition of furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of arresting officer. It was also directed that the petitioner shall join the investigation. 3. The learned State Counsel has filed status report. The same be taken on record. 4. Heard. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.06 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-29426 of 2026 2 in compliance with order dated 21.05.2026, the petitioner has already joined the investigation, and that nothing has been left to be recovered from the possession of petitioner. In view of above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that the order dated 21.05.2026 be made absolute. 6. The learned State counsel has submitted that although the petitioner has joined investigation, but she did not cooperate during the course of investigation, and that recovery of stolen property is yet to take place. As per learned State counsel for the above said purpose custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. 7. The record has been perused carefully. 8. With regard to fact-situation of this case and the above mentioned arguments, following are the relevant factors which are supposed to be taken into consideration:- i) that the petitioner has already joined the investigation; ii) that as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Vinay Kumar Gupta v. State of Madhya Pradesh’ [Criminal Appeal No.939 of 2026, decided on 16.02.2026] the petitioner cannot be forced to assist the prosecuting agency in recovery of incriminating material, which may harm his own interests or may defeat his right of defence; iii) that as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Sanjay Sharma v. State of Haryana’ [Criminal Appeal No.767 of 2026, decided on 09.02.2026], collection of evidence is the responsibility of the Investigating Officer, and that an accused cannot be compelled to self-incriminate himself; iv) that the petitioner being a female deserves a considerate view; DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.06 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-29426 of 2026 3 v) that the petitioner has clean antecedents; vi) that in the video-clip itself there is no allegation against the petitioner that she had refused to return the gold; vii) that the investigation and trial are not likely to be concluded in near future; viii) that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not likely to produce a fruitful result; ix) that there is nothing on record to show that while on anticipatory bail, the petitioner is likely to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses; and x) that there is nothing on record to show that while on anticipatory bail, the petitioner will not participate/cooperate in the investigation. 9. Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions and the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation, it is hereby ordered that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail. Hence, the present petition is hereby allowed and the order dated 21.05.2026, whereby the petitioner was accorded the benefit of interim anticipatory bail, is hereby made absolute. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge July 06, 2026 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.06 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document