Sanjeev Kumar @ Sodhi v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.19235 of 2026 Date of decision: 30.04.2026 Sanjeev Kumar @ Sodhi

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present :- Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, Advocate Mr. Chetan Sharma, Advocate Mr. Deepak Girotra, Advocate and Mr. Yaseen Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate for the complainant.

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition under Section 482 BNSS (corresponds to Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.59 dated 18.03.2026, under Sections 125, 333 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Sections 336, 452, 506 IPC) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Jaito, District Faridkot.

2.

This Court vide order dated 08.04.2026, while issuing notice of motion, granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner, subject to his joining the investigation.

NEETU RANI 2026.05.01 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

CRM-M No.19235 of 2026 -23.

Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, Advocate/learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the order dated 08.04.2026, the petitioner has joined the investigation.

4.

Learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, does not controvert the said fact and further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in the present case. 5.

In view of the above, the order dated 08.04.2026 is made absolute.

6.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. 7.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 30.04.2026 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No NEETU RANI 2026.05.01 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD