128 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 Harinder Singh alias Harwinder Singh ... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh. Present: Mr. Harjot Singh Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. 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. 87 dated 25.05.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section(s) 305 & 331(4) of ‘the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’, Police Station Ahmedgarh, District Malerkotla, Punjab. 2. The FIR of this case came into being at the instance of ‘Manshant Singh’, hereinafter being referred to as “complainant” only. It was stated by the above named complainant that his father, namely ‘Bhalinderjeet Singh’ died on 28.11.2025, upon which he along with his sister, namely ‘Japjeet Kaur’ came to India on 08.12.2025. As per complainant when he asked his Aunt (Bua), namely ‘Surinderjit Kaur’ and uncle, namely ‘Sukhchain Singh’ to give him mobile phone of his father, they handed it over to him after deleting the data including the CCTV DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 2 footage of the preceding 15 days. The complainant further stated that ‘Harinder Singh’ (the petitioner herein), who was employed to look after his father, as also the caretaker of the house, in connivance of the above- mentioned persons, had committed theft of cash, gold, silver and other valuables, the value thereof comes out to be ₹2,25,00,000/- approximately. As per complainant the above-mentioned persons attempted to withhold the mobile phone of his deceased father and also deleted the data including the CCTV footage from the phone. 3. It is the case of prosecution that in view of above-mentioned complaint, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. 6. Heard. 7. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case without any reasonable basis. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegations against the petitioner are for the commission of an offence which is triable by the court of Judicial Magistrate and the maximum punishment prescribed for the offence is upto seven years only. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR has been lodged with malafide intentions and it has not been mentioned in DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 3 the FIR that the jewellery and other gold items of the deceased were duly handed over to the complainant. 8. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the sole basis for implicating the petitioner in the present case is a CCTV footage, but the above-mentioned CCTV footage, in itself, does not conclusively proves that the gold items of the deceased were stolen by the petitioner. As per learned counsel for the petitioner in fact the CCTV footage, itself, shows that the petitioner was not the only person who was present at the residence of deceased just after his death, but in fact several persons were there. 9. While controverting the above-mentioned arguments, the learned State counsel has contended that there are very specific allegations qua the fact that the petitioner was caretaker of the deceased father of the complainant and he was also looking after the entire affairs of the house of the deceased, because both the children of the deceased, i.e. the complainant and his sister are Non-Resident Indians. It has further been contended by learned State counsel that the petitioner was seen taking away a black colour bag from the first floor to the store room and thereafter only he reported about the death of deceased to the neighbours and other relatives. 9. In addition to above, the learned State counsel has also contended that very specific plea has been taken by the complainant in his complaint, wherein he disclosed the source and quantum of gold purchased by his deceased father, and that is worth several crores. It has been further contended by learned State counsel that in order to dig out the truth behind the above-mentioned death, and to ascertain the role of petitioner in DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 4 the commission of offence, his custodial interrogation is necessary. 10. The record has been perused carefully. 11. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is settled principles of law that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail, and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the above said benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. 12. With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar’ 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is a rule. 13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the above-mentioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the above said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. 14. Similarly, in the case of ‘Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another’ [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024], the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 5 remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. 15. In the case of ‘Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab’ 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that:- i) The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in exceptional cases only; ii) In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail; and iii) Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be exercised. 16. 16. In the light of above-mentioned principles of law, if the facts and circumstances of the present case are examined, it transpires that although there is delay of more than six months in reporting the matter to the police, yet, this fact cannot be ignored that in natural course the complainants were not supposed to be aware of the identity of the person who was responsible for taking away the valuables belongings of their DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-35629 of 2026 6 deceased father. In ordinary course it was expected from the complainant to ascertain as to whether any theft has been committed or not, and thereafter only the FIR against the petitioner has been lodged. Here this fact cannot be ignored that there are very specific allegations that the data including the CCTV footage from the mobile phone of the deceased has been deleted and the same is likely to have been done by the petitioner only, as he was the only caretaker of the deceased. 17. Taking into consideration the entire fact-situation, in order to dig out truth behind the above-mentioned incident, in my opinion, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is of paramount importance in the present case. If the valuable right of custodial interrogation available to the Investigating Agency is denied in the instant case, it may result into miscarriage of justice, as the Investigating Agency may not be able to find out truth behind the incident. 18. Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the prevailing factors, it is hereby observed that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of bail and the above-mentioned petition is devoid of merits. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed, accordingly. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge July 06, 2026 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.07 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document