IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

208 CRM-M-11342-2026 Decided on:- 24.03.2026 Ravi Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Rajdeep Singh, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Barjinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

* * * * *

AMARJOT BHATTI, J.

1. Petitioner Ravi Kumar has filed petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 28 dated 10.02.2026 under Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 376 IPC) registered at Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur.

2. As per the facts of case, prosecutrix ‘SK’ gave her statement that she is about 36 years of age and had done M.Sc. Nursing. In the year 2018, she got married with Amandeep Singh. No child was born out of this wedlock. Matrimonial dispute was going on. She filed a divorce petition in the middle of year 2025. She was working as a professor in National College of Nursing, Khurana, Sangrur, when she came in contact with Ravi Kumar in the year 2024. They became friends and started talking to each other. Ravi Kumar proposed to marry her. She accepted the proposal of marriage for better future. He showed her one kothi of his friend Prince as his own house. He gave mobile phone of his friend’s mother by showing as his own mother. She had a communication with her family members regarding marriage. They took rental accommodation jointly at Kakra Road and started residing there. He developed physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage. He promised to marry her and continuously exploited her. On 28.12.2025, mother of Ravi Kumar invited both of them on ring ceremony of her daughter and there she was shown some photographs of ring ceremony of Ravi Kumar with some other girl. She returned home and thereafter, when Ravi Kumar also reached home, she made inquiry from him. He started quarreling with her. Even on that day, despite her refusal, he developed physical relations with her. Finally, matter was reported to police. During inquiry, Ravi Kumar again assured to perform marriage with her after she took divorce from her husband. He continued to have physical relations with her. By keeping her in dark, he performed marriage with another girl on 10.02.2026. With these allegations, present FIR has been lodged.

3. Learned counsel representing petitioner took the stand that relationship between prosecutrix and petitioner was consensual. Prosecutrix was already married and her divorce case was still pending when she maintained relationship with petitioner. Allegations levelled against him are false. Even otherwise, prosecutrix is well-educated, independent lady.

She deliberately continued with this relationship without considering the aforesaid factual position. His anticipatory bail application was wrongly declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge-Fast Track, Special Court, Sangrur, vide order dated 20.02.2026 (Annexure P-2). Petitioner is ready to join investigation. He will abide by terms of bail order. It is prayed that his anticipatory bail petition may be allowed.

4. Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State assisted by learned counsel representing respondent No. 2/complainant. It is pointed out by learned counsel representing respondent No. 2 that petitioner sexually exploited respondent No.2/prosecutrix with false promise of marriage. When prosecutrix came to know about ring ceremony of petitioner with some other girl, she returned to rented accommodation and even thereafter, he committed forcible sex with her. When complaint was filed with police, there he again assured to marry her once she took divorce from her husband. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

Detailed status report filed, confi