High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18115/2025disposed of

Rohit Hans v. State Of Punjab

2025-05-03Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18115-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.05.2025 Rohit Hans ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Lalit Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nitesh Sharma, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sudesh Sahi, Advocate for the complainant.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.35 dated 16.02.2025 under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 324(4), 351(2), 333, 3(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Dugri, Ludhiana.

On 03.04.2025, the following order was passed:- "XX XX XX XX Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that FIR (supra) was registered after a delay of 15 days of the alleged incident, which clearly dents the case set up by the prosecution. Date of birth of the petitioner is 14.09.2009 and he is nearly 15 years of age and is not involved in any other case. Moreover, the

maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 07 years. Notice of motion for 03.05.2025.

Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973).

If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law."

Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and on instructions from ASI Gaurav Chandail, at the very outset, informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 4.

In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 03.04.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). 5.

The petition stands disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 03.05.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No