209 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-1401-2026 Jagtar Singh ....Appellant Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents Date of Decision: July 08, 2026 Date of Uploading: July 08, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: None for the appellant. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab. None for respondent No.2. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) 1. Present appeal has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant in case bearing FIR No.98, dated 28.03.2026, under Section 3 of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (Amendment 2015), registered at Police Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural. 2. On 24.04.2026, the following order was passed: “Present appeal has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant in case bearing FIR No.98, dated 28.03.2026, under Section 3 of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (Amendment 2015), registered at Police Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural. It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is being harassed and humiliated by the complainant respondent No.2 and his relatives time and again. She has submitted that at their NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.07.08 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRA-S-1401-2026 P a g e | 2 behest, 7 other FIRs on similar allegations have been registered against the appellant. She has submitted that the appellant and the complainant, both are neighbors and on account of the personal rivalries, false and frivolous FIRs have been lodged. She has submitted that only to invoke the rigors of the Atrocities Act, the false allegations have been made against the appellant by the complainant as is evident from the record. She has submitted that the bar under Section 18 of the Act in such circumstances is not attracted as no prima facie case as alleged is made out against the appellant. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. K. D. Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. At this stage, Dr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate has appeared and filed his power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2 today in the Court, which is taken on record. He, however, has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and has submitted that there are specific allegations against the appellant regarding the commission of offence. To come on 08.07.2026. In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The appellant shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS:- (i) That the appellant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so. (ii) That the appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (iii) That the appellant shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.” NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.07.08 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRA-S-1401-2026 P a g e | 3 3. Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that the appellant has joined investigation and he is not required for custodial interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the factum of the appellant having joined investigation and he is not required for custodial interrogation, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 24.04.2026 granting anticipatory bail to the appellant is hereby made absolute, 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 appellant 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 appellant 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. 8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 08, 2026 Naveen Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.07.08 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh