Gulab And Another v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 12.11.2025 Gulab and another ...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
Ms. Roja Agnihotri, Advocate with Mr. Piyush Setia, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
1.
Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.PC.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who have been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunderName & age of petitioner FIR No.
Date Sections Police Station District
1. Gulab aged about 30 years
2. Sultan, aged about 25 years 31.01.2025 299, 281 of BNS and Section 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1960 and Sections 3, 4 and 4-A of Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 Khui Khera Fazilka 2.
On 11.08.2025, this Court passed the following order: "1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.PC.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who have been booked
in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunderName & age of petitioner FIR No.
Date Sections Police Station District
1. Gulab aged about 30 years
2. Sultan, aged about 25 years 31.01.2025 299, 281 of BNS and Section 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1960 and Sections 3, 4 and 4-A of Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 Khui Khera Fazilka 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alla, contends that FIR has been lodged at the instance of one Vijay Kumar, who is an active member of the organisation known as Bajrang Dal, which is engaged in the welfare of cows and other animals.
3.
It is submitted that members of the said organisation, namely Vijay Kumar, Pankaj Swami, and Manish Swami, followed a vehicle/canter truck, bearing registration No. PB46M-7770, which was allegedly carrying cows, using their own car, bearing registration No. HR-33D-1200. The canter was allegedly being driven at a high speed, and upon realizing that they were being followed, occupants of the canter abandoned the vehicle a short distance ahead and managed to flee. Thereafter, the cows were recovered, and the complainant party informed the police by meeting them at village Khui Khera.
4.
Counsel for the petitioners argues that petitioners have no connection whatsoever with the alleged incident. It is submitted that they were neither present at the spot, nor they have any association with the canter in question. They are not even the registered owners of the said vehicle. The only reason for their implication in the present case appears to be the existence of previous cases registered against petitioner No.2, and the fact that he is known to the police team. Moreover, petitioners are ready to join the investigation and fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners in the present case.
5.
Notice of motion.
6.
On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter. 7.
Adjourned to 12.11.2025.
8.
Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of their arrest, the petitioners shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioners shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
9.
Besides, it is directed that petitioners would hand over their passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if they possess. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they do not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioners would seek prior permission of the Court."
4.
Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that in compliance of the order dated 11.08.2025, passed by this Court, petitioners have joined the investigation, and have fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order. 5.
Learned State counsel on instructions from HC Kuldeep confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioners of joining the investigation on 23.08.2025 by the petitioners, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation.
6.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
7.
Since, petitioners have already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 11.08.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.
However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.
12.11.2025 (SANJAY VASHISTH) sonia JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned:
YES/NO Whether Reportable:
YES/NO