102 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No. M-34376 of 2026 Date of Decision: 21.07.2026 Sukhwinder Singh alias Sukhi alias Sukhjinder Singh ... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh. Present: Mr. Amandeep Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Vikas Bishnoi and Ms. Dhariya Garg, Advocates for the complainant. 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. 131 dated 03.06.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section(s) 331(5), 305, 317(2), 318(4) & 238 of ‘the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’, Police Station City Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab. 2. The FIR of this case came into being at the instance of ‘Baldev Kumar’, hereinafter being referred to as “complainant” only. It was stated by the above named complainant that his wife, namely ‘Kanchan’ was working as ‘Teacher’ in ‘Rajasthan Government’ and tht in the year 2019 she DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.21 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-34376 of 2026 2 had retired. The complainant further stated that out of her retiral funds they purchased a gold biscuit weighing 400 grams from Sikkar, Rajasthan. As per complainant her wife passed away in the year 2022 and therefore, he employed housemaid, namely ‘Rani Sharma’ who used to clean house and cook food. The complainant further alleged that he had kept a sum of ₹50,000/-, and the above-mentioned gold biscuit, in the steel almirah. According to complainant the above named ‘Rani Sharma’ had stolen the above-mentioned money and gold biscuit. The complainant further stated that ‘Suman Rani’ and her husband, namely ‘Suresh Nagpal’ in collusion with ‘Gurpreet Singh’ had sold the gold biscuit to ‘Sukhwinder Singh alias Sukhi’ (the petitioner herein) and thereafter, ‘Rani’, her husband ‘Suresh Nagpal’, ‘Gurpreet Singh’, his wife, namely ‘Paramjit Kaur’ and mother ‘Rajwinder Kaur’ got prepared gold ornaments. 3. It is the case of prosecution that pursuant to 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. Mr. Vikas Bishnoi and Ms. Dhariya Garg, Advocates, enter appearance on behalf of the complainant and file memorandum of appearance. The same be taken on record. 7. Heard. DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.21 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-34376 of 2026 3 8. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he purchased the stolen property. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the above- mentioned offence comes within the ambit of Section 317(2) of BNS, and that the above-mentioned offence is compoundable. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has already entered into compromise with the complainant and in this regard the complainant has sworn an affidavit. The above-mentioned affidavit has been placed on record by learned counsel for the petitioner. The same be taken on record. 9. The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that this fact is proved that the complainant has entered into compromise with the petitioner, and that the complainant does not want to proceed further, qua present prosecution, against the petitioner. 10. The learned State counsel has contended that the recovery is, yet, to be effected. 11. The record has been perused carefully. 12. Taking into consideration the fact that the allegations against the petitioner are for the commission of offence punishable under Section 317(2) of BNS only, and that as per compromise arrived at between the complainant and the petitioner, the matter has already been settled and the offence is compoundable, it is hereby held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 13. In view of the above-mentioned discussion, the present petition is hereby allowed and the petitioner is hereby accorded the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is hereby directed that that in the event of his arrest, the DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.21 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-34376 of 2026 4 petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of arresting officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when notice is served upon him in writing, by the Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 14. It is, however, clarified that any observations recorded in the above-mentioned order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge July 21, 2026 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.21 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document