The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while granting anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, affirms the continuity of pre-arrest bail jurisprudence analogous to CrPC Section 438. The decision reiterates that, subject to investigation cooperation, custodial interrogation is not always necessary even in sexual offence cases — cementing the application of BNSS in criminal proceedings. This judgment stands as binding authority for subordinate courts and clarifies interpretive continuity for practitioners under the new BNSS regime.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/51037/2025 of SACHIN AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC011453112025 |
| Date of Registration | 09-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within jurisdiction |
| Type of Law |
|
| Questions of Law | Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 BNSS in respect of offences under BNS and POCSO, and whether custodial interrogation is warranted when the accused joins investigation. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS (analogous to Section 438 CrPC) may be granted, provided the petitioners have joined investigation and are not required for custodial interrogation. The judgment made absolute the interim bail earlier granted, subject to statutory conditions. The Court considered the nature of allegations and the lack of necessity for pre-trial incarceration. The decision affirms procedural continuity under BNSS regarding anticipatory bail. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petition involved a pre-arrest bail application in FIR No. 15 dated 19.01.2025, initially registered under Section 127(6) BNS, with later additions of Section 351(2) BNS and Section 4 POCSO Act. After interim bail and joining investigation by the petitioners, the State confirmed no need for custodial interrogation. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Punjab and Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, especially interpreting BNSS for anticipatory bail matters |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Affirms that the provisions of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS functionally mirror Section 438 CrPC in scope and practical application.
- Clarifies that custodial interrogation is not automatically warranted in offences involving Sections 127(6), 351(2) BNS, or Section 4 POCSO Act if the accused join investigation.
- Lawyers may rely on this judgment to argue pre-trial liberty for clients under analogous charges, especially under the BNSS regime.
- The Court expressly directs that interim bail, once granted and conditions met, may be made absolute where circumstances so justify.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court considered the petitioners’ request for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, noting that BNSS provisions are analogous to Section 438 CrPC.
- The Court took cognizance of the fact that the petitioners joined investigation as directed during the interim bail period.
- The State, via the Investigating Officer, confirmed that the petitioners have cooperated with the investigation and that custodial interrogation is not required.
- Considering the nature of the allegations and absence of a necessity for pre-trial incarceration, the Court found merit in making the interim bail absolute subject to statutory safeguards under Section 482(2) BNSS.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS.
- Complied with Court’s direction to join investigation after interim bail was granted.
State
- Informed the Court that petitioners had joined investigation and were no longer required for custodial interrogation.
Factual Background
The case pertains to an FIR (No. 15 dated 19.01.2025) lodged at Police Station Siwani, District Bhiwani, initially invoking Section 127(6) BNS, with subsequent addition of Section 351(2) BNS and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Upon grant of interim anticipatory bail, the petitioners joined investigation. Following their cooperation, the investigating agency reported that custodial interrogation was not necessary.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment discusses Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, noting its analogy to Section 438(2) CrPC regarding anticipatory bail and imposition of conditions.
- The application involves substantive offences under Section 127(6) and Section 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 POCSO Act.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing anticipatory bail principles under CrPC are affirmed under analogous BNSS provisions.