Anmoldeep Singh v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 316(2), 318(4)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 406, 420
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ss. 482, 482(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. Interim order dated 6.4.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. A.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)
On 6.4.2026, the following order was passed: ‘Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.26 dated 28.03.2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2) of the BNS, 2023 (Sections 420, 406 of IPC) and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professional Regulation Act, 2014, at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre- arrest bail. Inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question; the petitioner had merely introduced the victim to co-accused, namely, Imran Khan and had later on, transferred the money received by him to Imran Khan as well; & the petitioner is willing to join investigation and cooperate therein. Notice of motion. On the strength of advance service of copy of petition; Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG Punjab causes appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent – State of Punjab. Put up on 07.05.2026. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on
10.04.2026 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) the satisfaction of the Arresting ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.08 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.17916 of 2026 -2- Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when further called by Investigating Officer the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.’
Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 6.4.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation.
Operative part
In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. Interim order dated 6.4.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner 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.
Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.
Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
7.5.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.08 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 316(2), 318(4); Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 406, 420; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 482, 482(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 07 May 2026. The bench was SUMEET GOEL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.