Pritam Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 207-(O)+220-u CRM-M-7121-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.03.2026 PRITAM SINGH AND ANOTHER ... Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present :

Mr. Rohan Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. MS Khaira, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Ritu Punj, Advocate for the complainant.

**** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) CRM-10322-2026 Allowed as prayed for. Reply on behalf of the complainant along with Annexures A1 to A6, are taken on record, subject to just exceptions. Main Case 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.88, dated 10.07.2025, under Sections 318(4), 336, 338, 346(2), 340, 61(2) BNS, registered at Police Station Tappa Mandi, District Barnala. 2.

On 06.02.2026, this Court had passed the following order:- "Learned counsel inter alia contends that portion of land in question was as a matter of fact purchased by the grandfather of the petitioner from second wife of father of Jeewan Singh in the year 1993 while the rest which is contiguous to part of the dwelling house was allegedly purchased through the sale deed dated 16.05.2025, of which they were in possession for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Five days prior to lodging of the FIR they had even submitted an application to Tehsildar, Tapa dated 04.07.

2025, Annexure P4 to surrender the same and for registering a case against Sukhpal Singh @ Soni, complainant and his son as also two more relatives of the complainant and seven days thereafter, an agreement was entered into between the complainant and Jeewan Singh, leading to filing of a suit for specific performance. In a suit for permanent injunction with regard to same property, interim injunction has been granted in favour of the petitioners' father. Two co-accused have since been ASHOK KUMAR 2026.03.

CRM-M-7121-2026 (O&M) -2granted anticipatory bail. He, on instructions, submits that the petitioners are still ready and willing to surrender the said sale deed, however, shall not take benefit thereof during trial. Further, they shall join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate, if given an opportunity by this Court.

Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation on or before 16.02.2026. In the event of their arrest, they shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 482(2) BNSS.

However, it is clarified that if the petitioners do not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.

Adjourned to 09.03.2026."

3.

Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioners have not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, they shall make themselves available without demur.

4.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Ranjit Singh, affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioners and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. 5.

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioners is allowed and the order dated 06.02.2026 granting interim bail to them, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

6.

However, it is made clear that if the petitioners fail to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to them.

09.03.2026 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) ashok JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2026.03.09 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document