The Court held that, where an accused has joined investigation and custodial interrogation is not required, anticipatory bail originally granted on an interim basis can be confirmed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This decision affirms established precedent regarding the exercise of bail jurisdiction, and is binding authority within the Punjab & Haryana High Court’s territorial jurisdiction.
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 |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench (MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA) |
| Precedent Value | Binding within Punjab & Haryana High Court jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure (Anticipatory Bail) |
| Questions of Law | Whether anticipatory bail should be made absolute when the accused has joined investigation and custodial interrogation is not required. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
Where a petitioner, released on interim anticipatory bail and directed to join investigation, has complied with such direction and the investigating agency does not require his custody, there remains no justification for pre-trial incarceration. The interim bail may therefore be confirmed and made absolute, subject to conditions. The Court refrained from commenting on the merits and limited its finding to the facts of investigation compliance and custodial interrogation requirements. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
FIR No. 219 dated 31.05.2025 under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190, and (later) 117 of BNS at PS City Kharar; Petitioner released on interim bail on 17.09.2025 and joined investigation on 19.09.2025; Status report confirmed he was not required for custodial interrogation. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and authorities within Punjab & Haryana High Court’s jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, may be cited for persuasive value |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that once the accused joins the investigation and the investigating agency confirms that custodial interrogation is not necessary, pre-trial incarceration is not required.
- Reinforces the principle that interim anticipatory bail may be made absolute in such circumstances, streamlining anticipatory bail confirmations.
- Lawyers can rely on this ruling to support bail applications where compliance with investigation is established and no custodial interrogation is sought by police.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court considered the status report, noting that the petitioner complied with the direction to join investigation after being granted interim bail.
- It was specifically recorded on instructions from the Investigating Officer that the petitioner was not required for custodial interrogation.
- Citing these facts, and without delving into the merits of the case, the Court held that pre-trial incarceration was unwarranted in such circumstances.
- The order granting interim bail was thus made absolute, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
- No reference was made to contrary or overruling precedent; instead, existing standards for bail confirmation were affirmed.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The petitioner had already joined the investigation as directed.
- No custodial interrogation by the investigating agency was required.
State
- Status report confirmed that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not necessary.
- No objection to the bail upon confirmation of compliance and absence of custodial requirement.
Factual Background
The petitioner was named in FIR No. 219 dated 31.05.2025 registered at Police Station City Kharar under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3), and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, with Section 117 added later. Interim anticipatory bail was granted on 17.09.2025, with a direction to join investigation, which the petitioner complied with on 19.09.2025. The State confirmed that further custodial interrogation was not required.
Statutory Analysis
- The petition was decided under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, relating to the Court’s inherent powers to grant anticipatory bail.
- The Court referenced compliance with conditions set out under Section 482(2) of the BNSS upon granting relief.
- No new interpretation or reading down/up of statutory provisions was undertaken; the decision applies settled standards for confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment applies and affirms prevailing standards regarding anticipatory bail.