Archana v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 05.08.2025 Archana ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Prince Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, 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.49 dated 06.02.2025, registered under Section 108 of BNS, 2023, at Police Station Kotwali Kapurthala, District Kapurthala.

2.

On 03.07.2025, the following order was passed:- "XX XX XX XX Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR (supra). The deceased husband of the petitioner was facing severe economic distress and he was a drug addict facing cases registered under the NDPS Act (Annexure P-5) and under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Annexure P-6). The husband of the petitioner tried to commit suicide on 29.01.2025. The

petitioner immediately rushed him to the hospital and made arrangement for his treatment, however, he breathed his last on 05.02.2025 in the hospital. Further the necessary ingredients to make out a case of abetment as provided under Section 107 IPC are clearly missing. The petitioner is a lady having a young child.

Per contra, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that the deceased committed suicide due to the matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife and the petitioner is responsible for the suicide.

Adjourned to 05.08.2025.

In the meantime, keeping in view the 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 the Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and on doing so or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.

If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear before the Illaqa Magistrate, who would then

summon the Investigating/Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in investigation, in terms of the order of this Court.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court."

3.

Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and on instructions from ASI Manjit Singh, 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 03.07.2025 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 05.08.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No