The judgment reaffirms that when an accused has joined investigation and the State confirms custodial interrogation is not necessary, anticipatory bail should be confirmed, barring exceptional circumstances. This ruling aligns with prevailing precedent and serves as binding authority for subordinate courts in Punjab and Haryana, relevant to all criminal matters governed by BNSS.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/52516/2025 of HARMOHINDER SINGH VIRK Vs STATE OF PUNJAB |
| CNR | PHHC011510982025 |
| Date of Registration | 16-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within its jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure (Anticipatory Bail under BNSS) |
| Questions of Law | Whether anticipatory bail should be granted where the petitioner has joined investigation and custodial interrogation is not required. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The petitioner, facing an FIR under multiple sections of the BNS, was released on interim bail and ordered to join investigation. The State reported compliance and confirmed that custodial interrogation was unnecessary, prompting the Court to grant anticipatory bail conclusively. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Punjab & Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, potentially Supreme Court in interpreting BNSS anticipatory bail provisions |
| Follows | Existing principles regarding anticipatory bail post-joining investigation |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms: If the accused joins investigation and the State declares custodial interrogation unnecessary, anticipatory bail should generally be made absolute.
- The granting of anticipatory bail is subject only to compliance with statutory conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
- The judgment proceeds without addressing merits, clearly distinguishing procedural compliance as the decisive factor.
- Lawyers can use this decision as precedent to support anticipatory bail applications where similar facts exist.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted that the petitioner complied with the earlier direction by joining the investigation.
- On record, the State counsel confirmed that the petitioner was not required for custodial interrogation.
- Primacy was given to the importance of personal liberty and avoiding unnecessary pre-trial incarceration where investigative needs are already met.
- The decision was limited to the procedural compliance by the petitioner and the State’s position, rather than substantive assessment of allegations.
- The Court directed that the interim bail granted earlier be made absolute subject to satisfaction of statutory conditions.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS.
- Joined investigation as directed by the Court.
State
- Filed a status report confirming the petitioner joined investigation on 19.09.2025.
- Stated, on instructions from investigating officer, that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required.
Complainant: Represented, but no separate specific arguments were recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
The petitioner was implicated in FIR No. 219 dated 31.05.2025, registered at Police Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar under various substantive sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190, and 117 BNS). Pursuant to interim bail granted on 17.09.2025, the petitioner duly joined investigation. The State, via status report, confirmed petitioner’s cooperation and negated the need for custodial interrogation, leading the Court to finalize anticipatory bail.
Statutory Analysis
- The Court dealt with Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, relating to powers to grant anticipatory bail.
- It was reiterated that fulfillment of procedural conditions (joining investigation) and the State’s confirmation regarding custodial interrogation dictate grant of anticipatory bail.
- The direction to comply with Section 482(2) of BNSS reinforces that statutory bail conditions remain operative.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment affirms established law regarding anticipatory bail procedure and requirements.