IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 21.01.2026 BALKAR SINGH ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

****

KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.86 dated 06.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 64, 87, 137(2) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala.

2. Vide order dated 10.12.2025, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter:-

“This Court while issuing notice of motion on 01.09.2025 had passed the following order:

“Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR was registered on the statement of mother of the prosecutrix, alleging that the son of the petitioner had enticed away the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and subsequently established forceful physical relations with her. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only on account of being father of the main accused, and that he had no role to play in the alleged occurrence. Infact, there is also an inordinate delay in the lodging of the present FIR, wherein it is contained that the prosecutrix had allegedly been enticed away in the last week of 2024, and that she returned on 23.03.2025; yet the instant FIR was was lodged only on 06.05.2025. It is also highlighted that the on a previous occasion, the prosecutrix had got registered a similar FIR against another person on 28.06.2023, under Sections 376-D, 376-DA of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, wherein subsequently the prosecutrix and complainant turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution, resulting in the acquittal of the said accused.

Learned State counsel prays for time to verify the aforesaid factual position.

Adjourned to 09.09.2025.

Interim order to continue.”

Learned State counsel informed the Court that in compliance of the previous order, respondent No.2 has been served.

However, there is no appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.

Adjourned to 21.01.2026.

In the meantime, the petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/ Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023:-

(1) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so.

(2) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts to the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer.

(3) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

Needless to mention that the investigating agency/officer shall continue with the investigation of the case in usual manner.

Interim order to continue.”

3. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Harish Kumar, submits that in compliance of order dated 10.12.2025, the petitioner has joined the investigation on 16.12.2025 and is not required for any further investigation.

4. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. Order dated 10.12.2025 passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute.

5. This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner(s) indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

6. This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner(s).

7. The accuse