Satish Yadav v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 24.03.2026 SATISH YADAV .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Ms. Navdeep Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. Rohit Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Satish Yadav, aged about 25 years 26.06.2025 303(2), 318(4), 341(2), 61(2) of BNS, Sadar Rajpura Patiala 2.

After hearing the submissions addressed by counsel for the petitioner, on 24.12.2025, following order was passed:- "2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the security officer, namely Rabender Kumar, is also a co-accused in the present case and has already been granted the concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed in CRM-M-58811-2025

(Annexure P-3), on the ground that the aforesaid coaccused had no role in making fraudulent entries pertaining to the entry and exit of trucks.

In contrast, allegations against the present petitioner are based on CCTV footage wherein the petitioner is allegedly seen present and showing an RFID tag in front of the camera and making a sensor entry. It is alleged that as per the CCTV footage, truck bearing registration No.RJ-32-GC-1718 never actually entered the factory premises, yet its entry was fraudulently recorded through the RFID tag by the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, argues that petitioner is not an employee of the complainant-factory and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and to fully cooperate with the investigating agency, provided he is protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

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.

6.

Adjourned to 28.01.2026.

To be shown in the urgent list.

7.

Meanwhile, petitioner shall not be arrested. However, issue of joining of investigation by the petitioner would be examined on the next date of hearing, after reviewing the status report, which is yet to be filed by learned State counsel."

3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that, petitioner is ready to join the investigation and fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed status report dated 26.01.2026 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place on the file.

5.

Taking into consideration the nature of allegations as stated in the FIR and the status report filed by learned State counsel, this Court is of the view that prosecution must establish the allegations primarily on the basis of electronic evidence or by identifying the accused persons observed in the CCTV footage.

6.

It is undisputed that petitioner was merely deployed to perform his duties, and the actual beneficiary of any alleged wrongdoing would be known either to the complainant or the investigating officer. Under ordinary circumstances, it cannot be presumed that petitioner, who was deputed as an Auto Plant Operator, was the key person entitled to receive, or capable of receiving, any significant portion of the alleged monetary benefit.

7.

Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition, by directing the petitioner to join the investigation within two weeks from today, or as and when called by the investigating agency, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory 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.).

8.

Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 9.

With the directions recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 24.03.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No