##PAGE1##

CRM-M-49685-2025 (O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

204 CRM-M-49685-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision:05.02.2026

Alisha Bhagat & others ... Petitioners

Vs.

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Mr. Rajesh Kapila, Advocate and

Ms. Himani Kapila, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Aditya Anand, Advocate for the complainant.

...

Manisha Batra, J. (Oral).

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of

anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.157, dated 01.07.2025,

registered under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station City

Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur.

2. Vide order dated 08.09.2025, passed by this Court, the

petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation.

3. Status report has been filed, as per which the petitioner has

joined investigation on 21.09.2025. Learned State counsel as well as counsel

for the complainant have submitted that the petitioner had extracted an

amount of Rs.15 lakhs from the victim. He has not got the same recovered

and has not cooperated with the investigation. For effecting recovery of that

1 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 09-02-2026 03:57:25 :::

CRM-M-49685-2025 (O&M) -2-

amount, his custodial interrogation is must. It is, therefore, stressed that the

petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned

counsel for the parties.

6. So far as the contention as raised by learned State counsel qua

allegation of non-cooperation is concerned, this Court does not find any

compelling ground to justify custodial interrogation of the petitioner due to that

reason. Since the well settled proposition of law is that once an accused joined

the investigation, then only because of the reason that nothing incriminating

could be discovered or no recovery was got effected from him, would not mean

that there is non-cooperation on the part of the accused. Reliance in this context

can be placed upon the observation as made in Santosh versus State of

Maharashtra (2017) 9 SCC 714 and Jugraj Singh versus State of Punjab,

SLP No.9190 of 2025. The purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself

available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to

compulsorily divulge self-incriminating information. In the instant case, the

conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and

responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation.

Keeping in view the nature of the allegations, pre-trial incarceration of the

petitioner is also not required. It is also well settled that pre-trial incarceration

should not be a replica of post conviction sentencing. As such, a case is made

out for allowing the present petition.

7. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated

08.09.2025, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to

the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (analogous to Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

2 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 09-02-2026 03:57:25 :::

CRM-M-49685-2025 (O&M) -3-

Procedure).

8. Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending

application, if any, is rendered infructuous.

(MANISHA BATRA)

05.02.2026 JUDGE

harjeet

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 09-02-2026 03:57:25 :::