IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

202+101 CRM-M-231-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision : 06.04.2026 Ramesh Kumar ...... Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and Anr.

..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate for petitioner.

Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Balkar Singh Aulakh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL)

CRM-10979-2026 This is an application u/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (482 Cr.P.C.) for placing on record Annexure P-6.

For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed. Accompanying document as Annexure P-6 is taken on record, subject to just exceptions.

Application is disposed of accordingly.

CRM-M-231-2026

1. Petitioner –Ramesh Kumar has filed 2^nd petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.17 dated 10.11.2025, under Section 308(2) of BNS 2023 and Section 66-E, 67-A of IT Act (Section 64 of BNS was added later on vide DDR No.18 dated

05.12.2025), registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib (Annexure P-1).

2. As per the facts of the case, prosecutrix N.K. filed written complaint against Ramesh Kumar, Charanjit Kaur and Parveen Kaur with the allegations of having obscene video in the possession of Ramesh Kumar and on that basis blackmailing her and raising demand for money. The prosecutrix alleged that said Ramesh Kumar committed forcible rape with her and on the basis of obscene video started blackmailing her. He also extracted money from her by giving threats that otherwise he would viral her video on social media. She disclosed this fact to her husband who also requested them not to viral her video. Parveen Kaur and Charanjit Kaur called her husband and showed him objectionable video and raised demand for money. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner denied the allegations. The version put forward by the prosecutrix is untrustworthy. She has involved his wife and daughter for showing obscene video and raising demand for money. In fact the prosecutrix was having extra-marital relations with one Jagmeet Singh who had recorded obscene video. The prosecutrix admitted this fact when her statement was recorded during investigation. Petitioner is R.M.P. doctor. He is having his own family. His wife is suffering from 50% paralysis. Recently, he had a dispute with Jagmeet Singh and on his complaint FIR No.14 dated 10.01.2026 is registered under Section 140(3), 3(5) of BNS 2023, at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib (Annexure P-6). The allegations levelled against him are false. He is ready to join the investigation.

4. Learned counsel representing State opposed the anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner. The prosecutrix has levelled specific serious allegations against the petitioner. These facts are confirmed when the statement of prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. Present petitioner obtained obscene video from the phone of Jagmeet Singh by administering him intoxicant substance. Thereafter, he started blackmailing the prosecutrix and under the said fear he developed forcible physical relations with her. He and his family members also extracted money from her by blackmailing her to viral the said video. Petitioner is required to join the investigation. His mobile phone is to be recovered. Considering the facts and gravity of offence, he is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

5. The first anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner was declined vide order dated 29.10.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib (Annexure P-3). First anticipatory bail petition filed in this Court bearing No.CRM-M-66536-2025 was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.12.2025 (Annexure P-5). Thereafter, second anticipatory bail application was again filed before learned Additional Sessions J