CRM-M-23032-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 153 CRM-M-23032-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.07.2026 Gagandeep Sharma ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. A. P. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr. L. S. Sekhon, Advocate and Ms. Sweedel Goyal, Advocate for the complainant. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. Through the instant petition, filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.59 dated 01.04.2026, registered under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 351(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 420, 406, 506 and 120-B IPC) at Police Station Longowal, District Sangrur. 2. As per the allegations, the complainant Veerpal Kaur had mortgaged 35.6 tolas of gold ornaments with Chahal Finance, Longowal. It is alleged that the petitioner introduced the complainant to co-accused Naresh Garg and his wife Riya Garg on the representation that the ornaments could be redeemed at a lower rate of interest. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner along with co-accused got the gold ornaments released from the finance company. On MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.15 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-23032-2026 (O&M) -2- 01.05.2024, gold jewellery weighing 17.2 grams was handed over by the petitioner and Naresh Garg against a sum of Rs.9,00,000/-. Thereafter, on 29.05.2024, another 18.4 grams of gold jewellery was similarly handed over against Rs.9,05,000/-. The jewellery was thereafter stated to have been retained by co-accused Riya Garg with an assurance that it would be returned upon repayment of the amount advanced. It is further alleged that despite the complainant arranging the requisite amount and repeatedly demanding return of her jewellery, neither the petitioner nor the co-accused returned the same. Instead, they postponed the matter and informed the complainant that the jewellery had already been sold and extended threats. On these allegations, the present FIR has been registered and the investigation proceedings are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur but the same had been dismissed, vide order dated 15.04.2026. Hence, he has filed the present petition. 3. During the pendency of this petition, learned counsel for the parties submitted before this Court that there were chances of an amicable settlement between them. Hence, the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, where the dispute has been amicably settled between the petitioner and the complainant and a settlement/agreement dated 29.05.2026 has been reduced into writing, which is available on the file of this case. 4. Learned State counsel has not disputed the factum of compromise having arrived at between the parties. MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.15 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-23032-2026 (O&M) -3- 5. Learned counsel for the complainant has also admitted that there is a valid compromise between the parties and the complainant has no objection if the present petition is allowed granting concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Keeping in view the aforementioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, particularly in view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties and the stand taken by the complainant, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by depriving the petitioner of the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted concession of anticipatory bail, subject to the compliance of conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. He is directed to appear before the Investigating/Arresting Officer to join investigation within a period of ten days from today or as and when subsequently required thereafter. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating/Arresting Officer shall release the petitioner on bail subject to his/her satisfaction. 7. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 14.07.2026 (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 2026.07.15 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document