CRM-M-43672 IN THE NIKHIL STATE OF PU 1 The d 2 The d 3 The d websi 4 Whet prono prono 5 The d judgm CORAM: HO Present: Mr Ms Ms *** MANISHA BA 1. Th 482 of Bharati grant of anticip registered unde “BNS”) at Polic 2. Th written compla 43672-2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH CR Versus PUNJAB The date when the judgment is reserv The date when the judgment is pronou The date when the judgment is upload website Whether only operative part of the jud pronounced or whether the full judgm pronounced The delay, if any, of the pronounceme judgment and reasons thereof. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MAN Mr. Ashish Soi, Advocate for the p Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Ms. BBS Sobti, Advocate for the c **** A BATRA, J. The instant petition has been filed b haratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, nticipatory bail in case arising out of under Section 306 of Bharatiya Ny t Police Station Division No.8, Ludhia The aforementioned FIR has been omplaint submitted by the compla JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-43672-2026 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondents reserved 21.08.2026 pronounced 24.08.2026 uploaded on the 24.08.2026 the judgment is judgment is Full ncement of full Not applicable MANISHA BATRA r the petitioner njab r the complainant filed by the petitioner under Section nhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for out of FIR No.212 dated 21.07.2026 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short udhiana. s been registered on the basis of a omplainant Sanjeev Kumar, Chief ction for 2026 short of a hief AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.24 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-43672 Security Office who was servin Hospital, Ludhi gloves 8 pieces scissors 2, forc hospital, and ha doing so and st duty due to wh made for taking 3. Ap grant of anticip Additional Sess 4. It i falsely implicat There is no wit allegations are any access to th His custodial in him. It is, theref 5. Pe the complainan petitioner. Reco ground for gran the petitioner do 43672-2026 (O&M) 2 Officer, DMC and Hospital, Ludhian serving as a cleaner-cum-helper in S Ludhiana, had committed theft of pieces, surgical blades 31 pieces, su , forceps 2 and Stoma bags 4 piece and had carried those items with him and stealing dressing material, etc. H to which his contractual services wer taking action against the petitioner. Apprehending his arrest, the petiti anticipatory bail, which has been dism l Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide orde It is argued by learned counsel for plicated in this case on the basis of so no witness to his committing theft of s are leveled on the basis of suspicio s to the inventory of the hospital. He dial interrogation is not required. No r , therefore, argued that the petition des Per contra, learned State counsel, lainant, has argued that there are sp . Recovery of stolen property is to r grant of anticipatory bail is made ou ner does not deserve to be allowed ba dhiana, alleging that the petitioner, er in Surgery Unit-IV of DMC and t of 02 bowl sets, 09 gauze pieces, ces, surgical blades (big) 2 pieces, pieces which was property of the th him. Previously also he had been etc. He had stopped coming for his es were terminated. Prayer has been petitioner moved an application for n dismissed by the court of learned e order dated 03.08.2026. sel for the petitioner that he has been s of some alleged secret information. eft of property of the hospital. The spicion. The petitioner did not have al. He is ready to join investigation. . No recovery is to be effected from on deserves to be allowed. unsel, assisted by learned counsel for are specific allegations against the is to be effected. No exceptional ade out. It is, therefore, stressed that ed bail. oner, and eces, eces, f the been r his been n for rned been tion. The have tion. from l for t the ional that AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.24 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-43672 6. Th 7. Th Hospital, Ludh investigation in is well settled p required to be e anticipatory bai offence. In the existing to reso finding no comp 8. It i not be construed case and shall n 9. Sin if any, is render 24.08.2026 Amit Sharma 43672-2026 (O&M) 3 This Court has heard the rival subm The petitioner is alleged to have st Ludhiana. For the purpose of con tion in the matter, his custodial interro ttled proposition of law that power fo to be exercised in exceptional and spar ry bail to some extent interferes in th n the instant case, no such exceptiona o resort to the extraordinary remedy o o compelling ground to allow the petiti It is, however, clarified that the o nstrued as an expression of opinion of shall not influence the outcome of the t Since the main petition has been rendered infructuous. (M Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No l submissions made by the parties. ave stolen the property of DMC and f conducting thorough and proper interrogation is required. More so, it wer for grant of anticipatory bail are d sparing circumstances, as grant of s in the sphere of investigation of an ptional circumstance is shown to be edy of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, e petition, the same is dismissed. t the observations made above shall ion of this Court on the merits of the of the trial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No and roper so, it il are nt of of an to be ngly, shall f the tion, AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.24 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.