208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM-M-29297-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 20.07.2026 Sushant Kumar ....Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present: Mr. Mehtab Singh Bhatti, Advocate for Mr. Gaurav Singh Bhatti, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG Punjab. Mr. Navkesh Singh, Advocate for the complainant. -.- N.S.SHEKHAWAT J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.64 dated 04.04.2026, registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 238 BNS (Corresponding Sections 302, 120- B, 201 IPC), at Police Station Model Town, Ludhiana. 2. While granting the concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 08.06.2026, the following contentions were noticed by this Court and the same have been reproduced below:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that even as per the status report submitted by the State of Punjab, only the son of the petitioner and his accomplices had beaten up the deceased and no other role has been assigned to him. It has been alleged that the petitioner fraudulently got signed LAMA TRIPTI SAINI 2026.07.21 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-29297-2026 (O&M) -2- from the brother of the deceased and no other role has been assigned to him. He further contends that in fact, during investigation, it was found that only the son of the petitioner was involved and being juvenile, he has already been admitted to concession of anticipatory bail by the trial Court on 28.04.2026 (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation in the present case. On the other hand, learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had the knowledge of the entire crime and he tried to mislead the complainant also.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions and further submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation may not be required. 4. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation. 5. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is allowed and the interim order dated 08.06.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 6. Pending application(s), if any, is/are disposed of. July 20, 2026 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) tripti JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No TRIPTI SAINI 2026.07.21 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document