Vishal v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M No.2561 of 2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.2561 of 2026 Date of decision : 19.3.2026 Date of uploading : 20.3.2026 Vishal .............Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Aakash Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.
On 29.1.2026, the following order was passed: 'Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are 04 accused and all were alleged to have been armed with datar and scissors. He further submits that the allegations are general in nature against all of them. He further submits that he is ready and willing to join investigation, however, there is no order in the present case to join the investigation. Learned State counsel further submits that vide order dated 19.01.2026, no coercive action was ordered to be taken but there was no direction regarding joining the investigation by the petitioner. In view of the above, order dated 19.01.2026, is modified to the extent that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer.
The petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:- (i) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
CRM-M No.2561 of 2026 -2inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.
Adjourned to 19.03.2026.'
1.1 On 9.2.2026, the following order was passed:
'Present application has been filed seeking addition of Sections 304 & 310(2) of BNS, 2023 in the head note; prayer clause and in orders dated 19.01.2026 and 29.01.2026, passed by this Court in the main case. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was granted interim relief by this Court vide orders dated 19.01.2026 and 29.01.2026. He submits that inadvertently Sections 304 and 310(2) of BNS were not mentioned in the headnote and prayer clause of the petition. Thus, he prays that offence under Sections 304 and 310(2) of BNS, be incorporated, in the headnote; prayer clause of the petition as well as in orders dated 19.01.2026 and 29.01.2026 passed by this Court in CRM-M-2561-2026.
Notice in the application.
On the asking of the Court, Ms. Ramta Chowdhary, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. She pleads no objection if the prayer made in the application is allowed. In view of the above, the present application is allowed. Offence under Sections 304 and 310(2) of BNS, is ordered to be added in the headnote; prayer clause of the petition as well as in orders dated 19.01.2026 and 29.01.2026 passed by this Court in CRM-M-2561-2026. The petitioner is granted interim relief for the newly added offence i.e. under Section 304 and 310(2) of BNS, as well.
This order shall be read as part of orders dated 19.01.2026 and 29.01.2026.'
2.
Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the orders dated 29.1.2026 and 9.2.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation. 3.
In view of the above, this Court is inclined to confirm the orders
CRM-M No.2561 of 2026 -3dated 29.1.2026 and 9.2.2026. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The interim orders dated 29.1.2026 and 9.2.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
4.
These orders should not be treated as "blanket" order. These will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. These shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 5.
Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of these orders in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.
6.
Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 19.3.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No