Anticipatory bail granted on interim basis under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was made absolute as the petitioner joined investigation and custodial interrogation was found unnecessary. The Court clarified conditions and scope, affirming established law and providing binding authority for anticipatory bail jurisprudence under BNSS.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/53206/2025 of INDERJIT KAUR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB |
| CNR | PHHC011511792025 |
| Date of Registration | 18-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 28-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the High Court of Punjab and Haryana; authoritative on anticipatory bail under BNSS |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure (Anticipatory Bail under BNSS) |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that when an accused, granted interim anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, joins investigation as directed and custodial interrogation is no longer necessary, anticipatory bail can be made absolute, subject to statutory conditions. The order is not blanket—it is specific to the FIR in question and does not provide perpetual protection. Liberty remains with the State or complainant to seek cancellation/recall if conditions are breached or other sufficient cause arises. The judgment reinforces a structured and condition-bound approach to anticipatory bail under the BNSS framework. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner, a 51-year-old woman, was apprehending arrest in FIR No.75 dated 19.05.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 3(5) of BNSS 2023. She was attributed only with a “lalkara” (instigation) while the co-accused faced graver allegations. On complying with investigation requirements and with no further necessity for custodial interrogation, the petition was allowed and interim bail made absolute. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the Punjab & Haryana High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts interpreting anticipatory bail provisions under BNSS |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Confirmation that interim anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS may be made absolute if the petitioner joins investigation and custodial interrogation is not required.
- Clear limitation that such bail is not “blanket” protection and is confined to the specific FIR only.
- Statutory conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS strictly apply and violation can lead to cancellation/recall.
- State or complainant retains liberty to seek revocation of bail upon breach or sufficient cause.
- Lawyers should ensure compliance with investigation directives to sustain anticipatory bail for their clients.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court observed that since the petitioner had joined investigation as directed by the interim order, and the State reported no requirement for further custodial interrogation, the basis for arrest ceased to exist.
- By making interim anticipatory bail absolute, the Court established that compliance with investigative requirements is a key consideration under Section 482 BNSS.
- The Court emphasized that anticipatory bail orders are case/FIR-specific and do not function as general immunity from arrest in unrelated cases.
- The Court retained liberty for the State/complainant to apply for cancellation or recall of bail in case of non-compliance or any other sufficient cause, upholding the conditional nature of such relief.
- Observations made in the order were for bail adjudication alone and not on the case merits.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Petitioner is a 51-year-old lady.
- Only “lalkara” (instigation) attributed to her; grievous injury alleged against co-accused.
- Willingness to join and cooperate in investigation.
State
- Initially appeared on notice; later confirmed the petitioner had joined investigation.
- Stated that petitioner was not required for further custodial interrogation.
Factual Background
The case arose from an FIR (No. 75 dated 19.05.2025) registered under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 3(5) of BNSS 2023 at Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran. The allegations against the petitioner were limited to instigation (“lalkara”), with more serious injuries attributed to a co-accused. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, undertook to join investigation, and complied with the Court’s directive. After joining investigation and with the State not seeking further interrogation, the interim bail was made absolute.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 482 BNSS: The Court interpreted Section 482 to mean anticipatory bail can be made absolute if the applicant complies with investigation requirements and custodial interrogation is not needed, subject to statutory conditions specified in sub-section (2).
- The order highlighted the non-blanket nature of anticipatory bail under this section, restricting its application to the particular FIR at issue.
- The statutory liberty for cancellation or recall in case of breach was explicitly affirmed.
Procedural Innovations
- The order reaffirms structured procedural safeguards, requiring the petitioner to join investigation before interim relief can be made absolute.
- Emphasized the non-blanket, FIR-specific nature of anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS.
- Preserved State/complainant’s right to seek cancellation or recall as a procedural check.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing anticipatory bail law principles affirmed and adapted to BNSS context.