Mohammad Shahid v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 10 Feb 2026
- Bench
- VINOD S BHARDWAJ
Outcome
Allowed
custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is allowed and the
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since the petitioner has joined the investigation and Since the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is…
Judgment
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Mr. Sukhmeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the for grant of anticipatory bail to Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the petitioner in case petitioner in case bearing FIR No.99 dated dated 17.09.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2) of the 318(4), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 aya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 24 of the Emigration Act, 1983 at Police Station of the Emigration Act, 1983 at Police Station Meharban, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana, District Ludhiana. Commissionerate Ludhiana, District Ludhiana
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that Learned counsel for the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner ssed by this Court, the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 29.10.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner pursuant to the order dated has joined investigation and is no longer required for investigation of the has joined investigation and is no longer required for investigation of the has joined investigation and is no longer required for investigation of the case.
Learned State counsel on instructions, corroborates the said Learned State counsel on instructions, corroborates the said Learned State counsel on instructions, corroborates the said averment and submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not averment and submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is averment and submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for the purpose of investigation. required for the purpose of investigation.
Operative part
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since the petitioner has joined the investigation and Since the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is allowed and the custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.11 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 203 CRM-M-59964-2025 (O&M) 2 interim order dated 29.10.2025 is made absolute.
However, if required, the petitioner(s) shall continue to join investigation as and when required to do so and shall abide by the terms and conditions, as laid down under Section 482 (2) BNSS.
10.02.2026 Sumit Gusain (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.11 19:16 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: custodial interrogation is not required, the present petition is allowed and the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2); Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Emigration Act, 1983 — s. 24; Police Station of the Emigration Act, 1983.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 10 Feb 2026. The bench was VINOD S BHARDWAJ.
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.