JUDGMENT :

NEERJA K. KALSON, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 438 Cr.P.C) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 61 dated 26.07.2023, under Sections 137(2), 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (Corresponding to Sections 363, 366-A of the Indian Penal Code), registered at Police Station Begowal, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1).

2. That the gravamen of the FIR reflects that the complainant - father of the victim has three children. His elder daughter - victim, aged about 17½ years, is a student of 10+2 class and was found missing from her house on 21.07.2025 after 6:00 p.m. It is further alleged that an amount of Rs.20,000/- and two tolas of gold were also found missing from the almirah of the house. Upon calling on the mobile phone of his daughter, the same was found switched off. Despite best efforts, the complainant and his family members could not trace her whereabouts. Thereafter, the complainant came to know that Harpreet Singh @ Samir had allured and enticed away his minor daughter on the pretext of marriage. Consequently, the present FIR came to be registered.

3. That learned counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia, iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question, as the same has been registered at the instance of the complainant - father of the victim. It is further submitted that the petitioner and respondent No. 2, i.e., the daughter - victim, have solemnized marriage with each other and have also got protection from this Hon’ble Court by way of filing a protection petition bearing CRWP No. 910 of 2026, vide order dated 03.02.2026. It is further submitted that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and that the parties were in a love relationship and are now residing together as husband and wife. Learned counsel further submits that no offence is made out against the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting the concession of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

4. That per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and has argued that the victim girl, who is a minor, has not been recovered so far and her custody has not been restored to her parents. It is further submitted that all the offences are duly made out against the petitioner and that the learned trial Court has rightly dismissed the bail application.

5. That I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case.

6. That as per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant - father of the victim has alleged that his minor daughter was enticed away by the petitioner on the pretext of marriage. However, it is apparent from the record that the matter arises out of a relationship between the petitioner and the daughter - victim, who are stated to have solemnized marriage with each other and are residing together. It is further to be considered that the petitioner has already approached this Hon’ble Court and has got protection in the said relationship. The petitioner is stated to have no criminal antecedents and nothing remains to be recovered from him. In such circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary at this stage.

7. That without commenting on the merits of the case of the petitioner, the petition in hand is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when called by the Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall cause his appearance and cooperat