Preet Singh @ Ramanpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 27.05.2026 PREET SINGH @ RAMANPREET SINGH ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

Present:

Ms. Pooja Rana, Advocate for Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS')]/438 Cr.P.C., is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.30 dated 19.02.2026, under Sections 137(2), 87 of BNS (Sections 363, 366 IPC), registered at Police Station Rangar Nangal, District Batala (Gurdaspur). 2.

Status report by way of affidavit of Manoj Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Sri Hargobindpur, Police District Batala has been filed by the State, which is taken on record. A copy thereof has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Vide order dated 21.05.2026 the petitioner was directed to join the investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter:- "1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No. 30 dated 19.02.2026 under Sections 137(2), 87 BNS (363, 366 IPC), registered at Police Station Rangar Nanagal, District Batala (Gurdaspur). 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner, aged about 23 years, has been falsely implicated in the present

-2case on the basis of the statement of the father of the prosecutrix, levelling allegations that the petitioner had enticed away his minor daughter on the pretext of marriage. It is submitted that the petitioner and the prosecutrix, being residents of the same neighbourhood, were well acquainted with each other, which was not to the liking of the complainant. The true factual matrix is that the family of the prosecutrix wanted to solemnize her marriage with another individual, for which reason, she voluntarily left her home, and even filed a petition seeking protection from her family members, bearing CRWP No.3045 of 2026, before this Court, wherein she was ordered to be produced before a Committee constituted under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, within a week from the order dated 18.03.2026. The petitioner neither had any role to play in the alleged occurrence, nor is there any material on record to establish otherwise. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation and cooperate.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Served with an advance copy of the petition, Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and prays for time to file response.

5.

Adjourned to 27.05.2026.

6.

In the meantime, the petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023;- (1) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so. (2) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts to the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer.

(3) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

7.

Needless to mention that the investigating agency/officer shall continue with the investigation of the case in usual manner." 4.

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Gurdev Singh, submits that in compliance of order dated 21.05.2026, the petitioner has joined the investigation on 22.05.2026 and is not required for any further investigation.

5.

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. Order dated 21.05.2026 passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the condition enumerated under Section 482(2) BNSS.

-36.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read as granting the petitioner(s) indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 7.

Liberty is reserved with the investigating agency/complainant to move to this Court for a direction under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.), in the event of violation of any term, stipulated under Section 482(2) BNSS, or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

8.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE May 27, 2026 Ritika Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No