CRM-M-30716-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 104 CRM-M-30716-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 06.07.2026 Kiran B. H. ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the third petition which has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer for issuing a direction to the learned trial Court that in the event of the petitioner's appearance before it in case arising out of FIR No. 03 dated 09.01.2019 under Section 420 IPC at Police Station City Faridkot, he be released on anticipatory bail. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, a Chartered Accountant, is alleged to have filed incorrect Income Tax Returns on behalf of the complainant, thereby enabling an unlawful refund, leading to registration of the aforementioned FIR. After completion of investigation, the challan was presented and the case is pending before the trial Court. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail and had also pursued proceedings for quashing of the FIR on the basis of a compromise. However, MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.07 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30716-2026 (O&M) -2- the compromise subsequently failed as the complainant resiled therefrom. Meanwhile, the earlier anticipatory bail petition came to be disposed of as infructuous after filing of the challan and on issuance of non-bailable warrants for securing the petitioner's presence before the trial Court, the present petition has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had earlier been protected by interim orders of this Court and the subsequent disposal of the earlier anticipatory bail petition as infructuous has left him exposed to arrest despite there being no requirement of custodial interrogation after presentation of the challan. It is argued that the petitioner is merely seeking protection to enable him to appear before the trial Court. it is submitted that the petitioner is a Chartered Accountant who acted on the basis of information supplied by the complainant that the alleged occurrence pertains to returns filed several years prior to registration of the FIR and that the dispute essentially arises out of documentary material. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a permanent abode and is not involved in any other criminal case. He undertakes to join the proceedings and abide by all conditions imposed by the Court and, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with evidence. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Reply has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned State counsel, while opposing the petition, has argued that the petitioner is facing prosecution for offences involving cheating and that non-bailable warrants have been issued against him on account of his failure to appear before the trial Court. It is argued that this is the third petition seeking similar relief and that no ground is made out for extending the extraordinary concession of MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.07 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30716-2026 (O&M) -3- anticipatory bail. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court on the premise that the earlier petition for anticipatory bail came to be disposed of as infructuous after presentation of the challan and now he apprehends his arrest pursuant to issuance of non-bailable warrants by the trial Court. However, such a circumstance does not furnish a fresh ground for grant of anticipatory bail. The record reveals that the petitioner had earlier availed the remedy of anticipatory bail before this Court and had remained protected under interim orders for a considerable period. The petition was ultimately disposed of as having become infructuous after the challan had already been presented. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner failed to appear before the trial Court, resulting in issuance of non-bailable warrants. The present petition is, thus, essentially an attempt to secure protection against the consequences flowing from his own non-appearance before the Court concerned. The petitioner has not been able to point out any substantial change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of the relief of anticipatory bail. Mere issuance of non-bailable warrants on account of non- appearance before the trial Court cannot be treated as a fresh cause to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of BNSS. If such a course were to be permitted, every accused avoiding appearance before the trial Court would be entitled to seek anticipatory bail repeatedly, which would defeat the very purpose of securing the presence of an accused before the Court. The appropriate course available to the petitioner is to appear before the trial Court and seek such relief as may be available to him in accordance with MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.07 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30716-2026 (O&M) -4- law. The extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail cannot be granted merely to circumvent the execution of non-bailable warrants issued due to his failure to appear. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 06.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.07 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document