Jagdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 18.02.2026 Jagdeep Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present :

Ms. Pawandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

***** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL) 1.

By virtue of the present petition under Section 482 BNSS, petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.151 dated 29.07.2025 registered under Section 108 of BNS at Police Station Sadar Khanna, District Khanna, has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail. 2.

Status Report dated 17.02.2026 by way of affidavit of Mr. Vinod Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Khanna, has been placed on record. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Balvir Singh, submits that petitioner has joined the investigation and is not needed for further investigation.

3.

On 03.09.2025, following order was passed by this Court:- "The present petition for grant of pre-arrest bail has been filed by petitioner-Jagdeep Singh, an accused in FIR No.151 dated 29.07.2025, registered against him, for commission of offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS, 2023, at Police Station Sadar Khanna, District Khanna.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Falsity of the case set up by the complainant is apparent from the fact that FIR was lodged after unexplained delay of four months. This intervening period was misused by the complainant to give different colour to the entire incident. Continuing further, learned counsel submits that though in the FIR complainant also mentioned about the suicide note allegedly written by his

son but for reasons best known even at that point in time the said suicide note was not given to the police authorities. Moreover, the reason as assigned by the complainant in the complaint that his son (since deceased) used to talk to the daughter of petitioner, who used to often object to their conversation and had used harsh words on which count the boy was upset and thus committed suicide, is also reason not sufficient enough to bring the case within the ambit of Section 306 IPC (108 BNS).

Learned counsel next submits that in the absence of any postmortem report, the real cause of death of the son of the complainant also remains uncertain. Still further, learned counsel submits that infact when the boy passed away villagers assembled and a note was found from his pocket, wherein it was mentioned that since he had failed in the examination, he is unable to fulfill the dreams of his parents. Thus, no positive overt act, on the part of petitioner, in close proximity with the death of son of the complainant has been highlighted/pointed out by complainant, which brought his son to a situation where the boy had no option but to end his life. Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused Ramandeep Kaur has also granted the concession of pre-arrest bail by this Court in terms of order dated 29.08.2025 (Annexure P-5).

Notice of motion.

Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, DAG Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of State of Punjab and seeks time to file detailed status report. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). Adjourned to 03.11.2025."

4.

Keeping in view the fact that petitioner has joined the investigation, interim bail granted vide order dated 03.09.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. Further the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will neither tamper

with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and nor will leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 5.

The petition stands allowed.

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE 18.02.2026 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No