CRM-M-23317-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 210 CRM-M-23317-2026 Decided on: 20.07.2026 RAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS …...Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB …...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Sukhdev Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who have been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District (1) Rajesh Kumar, (2) Gurcharan Singh and (3) Makhan Singh 28 07.04.2026 132, 221, 296, 351(2) of BNS (corresponding to sections 353, 186, 294 and 506 of IPC) Block Majari SAS Nagar (Mohali) 2. On 27.04.2026, following order was passed:- “1. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx 2. As per the allegations in the FIR, khair wood has already been recovered from one person, namely Nek Shah. However, allegations against the present petitioners are that, at the relevant time, they along with other persons, namely Rajesh Kumar, LAVISHA 2026.07.21 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-23317-2026 2 Rana, Makhan, Surinderpal, Bikram, Gurcharan Singh, Dass, and 15–20 unidentified individuals, surrounded the Forest Guard at the spot along with a government vehicle. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, as per the FIR, the alleged incident took place on 31.03.2026, whereas FIR was registered on 07.04.2026, i.e., after a delay of more than seven days, for which no plausible explanation has been furnished. It is further submitted that even prior to the alleged occurrence and registration of the FIR, complaints dated 14.02.2026 (Annexure P-3) and 24.02.2026 (Annexure P-2) had been submitted by Dass Ram son of Inder, who has now been arrayed as one of the accused in the FIR and is the father of petitioner No. 3-Makhan Singh. Counsel further contends that petitioner No.3 was, in fact, instrumental in highlighting the theft of khair wood from the forest area. Additionally, villagers had jointly submitted a complaint dated 01.04.2026 (Annexure P-4) to the Conservator, Sector 68, SAS Nagar (Mohali), but no action was taken by the Forest Department. 4. It is further argued that the actual theft of khair wood was committed by Nek Shah, from whom recovery has already been effected. While declining anticipatory bail to the petitioners (Annexure P-5), learned Court below had directed an inquiry into the role of Nek Shah and observed that, if an offence of theft is made out against him, appropriate proceedings be initiated. However, no such report has been produced on record, indicating inaction on the part of the Forest Department officials. It is contended that, in order to shield their own lapses, a false case has been foisted upon the petitioners and other co-accused. 5. Counsel further submits that the khair wood is presently in the possession of the petitioners, and petitioner No.1, being Sarpanch of the village, undertakes to facilitate its recovery to the Investigating Officer. Thus, counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the present case. 6. Notice of motion. 7. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent – State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter. 8. Adjourned to 20.07.2026. LAVISHA 2026.07.21 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-23317-2026 3 9. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of their arrest, the petitioners shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 10. Besides, it is directed that petitioners would hand over their passports to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if they possess. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they do not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioners would seek prior permission of the Court.” 3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that in compliance of the order dated 27.04.2026, passed by this Court, petitioners have joined the investigation, and have fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order. 4. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Paramjit Singh, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioners of joining the investigation on 01.05.2026 by the petitioners, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Since, petitioners have already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 27.04.2026, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. LAVISHA 2026.07.21 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-23317-2026 4 However, petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 7. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of. However, present order would be subject to the submission of passport of the petitioners to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if they possess, within a period of one week from today. Otherwise, they would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they do not possess any passport. It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 20.07.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.07.21 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh