Diyal Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab






    
    

  !" #$%$!&'(( $) *+ ,- &. &!/ -  (((( $$!& -% 0 -%,%  !" ,&2 ((((( %4!&. &
    

 
 

- % &'

-(+,*.$41$&6/7.8!#  7 "!-/ 4 $$!& -%( -( %2$1$&6/77 ,&2 
 



!"# 1.

On 28.10.2025, this Court had passed the following order:- "Learned counsel submits that it is a case of version and cross version. The FIR has even otherwise been lodged after delay of 17 days. Petitioner No.1 is shown to be empty handed while petitioner No.2 armed with bala, however, no injury has been attributed to her, which was caused by coaccused Angrej Singh and Sukhdev Singh. It is a case that petitioners were not even present at the spot and being family members of the aforesaid two coaccused have been falsely implicated in this case on account of there being a land dispute inter se parties. FIR stands registered against the complainant party for having caused injuries to three persons namely Asha Rani, Sukhdev

Singh and Shilo Bai. They are not involved in any other case. They are ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate. Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation on or before 10.11.2025. In the event of their arrest, they shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 482 (2) BNSS.

However, it is clarified that if the petitioners do not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.

Adjourned to 01.12.2025.9 2.

Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the aforementioned order, the petitioners have not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioners to appear, they shall make themselves available without demur.

3.

Learned State counsel on instructions affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioners and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation.

$

4.

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioners is allowed and the order dated 28.10.2025 granting interim bail to them, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (now 482(2) of BNSS, 2023) 5.

However, it is made clear that if the petitioners fail to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to them.  
 

    %

&'&()&!



  .$& %/ :/ / -%4 ;$&6 '

 %<!

:/ / -- 4!- 3* '

 %<!