ORDER :

Criminal Appeal No. 1860 of 2025

1. Leave granted.

2. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, by the impugned judgment and order dated 03rd December, 2024, has rejected the appellant's prayer for bail in anticipation of arrest.

3. FIR No.44/2022 dated 28th February, 2022 was registered at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana, Punjab for offence punishable under Sections 380 read with Sections 411 , 427, 454, 409, 201 and 120-B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860[IPC].

4. It is alleged in the FIR that a judicial file was stolen from the relevant court premises; that the stolen file had been delivered to the appellant via two co-accused, Chetan Kumar and Deepak Dogra, one after the other; and that, ultimately, the file was recovered by the police from a local salon owned by another co-accused, Hassan.

5. Although the appellant was not named in the FIR, his name transpired in a disclosure statement made by the co-accused, Deepak Dogra. Later, co-accused Hassan is reported to have also stated before the police that he had kept the stolen judicial file in his salon on telephonic instructions received from the appellant, who happened to be a customer of Hassan.

6. The allegation of theft of a judicial file is, indeed, very serious.

7. We have heard Mr. Siddharth Dave and Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in the two appeals as well as Mr. Mohd. Irshad Ahmad, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondent-State of Punjab.

8. Admittedly, upon investigation made by the relevant Deputy Commissioner of Police, a closure report dated 19th May, 2022 under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was filed before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana. However, by an order dated 04th July, 2022, the Magistrate refused to accept the closure report and in fact discarded the same with direction to the investigating officer of the case to continue with investigation and to report developments by 11th July, 2022.

9. From the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-State of Punjab, it appears that although challan has been filed against the co-accused, Chetan Kumar and Deepak Dogra, investigation against the appellant is still in progress and that it is proposed to file challan/final report, as the case may be, upon completion of such investigation.

10. It has not been disputed before us that the appellant was called thrice by the investigating officer and that he has joined the investigation. It is also undisputed that a computer monitor, which allegedly was stolen along with the judicial file, has since been recovered.

11. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances that investigation against the appellant has remained incomplete for more than two and half years, even after further investigation was ordered, coupled with the fact that the appellant has joined investigation, we are of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is not warranted and that the interim order passed by this Court, giving protection to the appellant from arrest, ought to be made absolute. Ordered accordingly.

12. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and order.

13. It is directed that in the event of the appellant being arrested, he shall be released on bail by the trial court on terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court.

14. It is made clear that in the event in future the appellant is found to be prima facie involved in a similar offence as it has transpired or acts in any manner interfering with the administration of justice and a complaint to that effect is received by