IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 08.04.2026 Rishi alias Rishi Arora ..... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Sarthak Jindal, Advocate and Mr. Gurmandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab.

****

AMARJOT BHATTI J.

1. Petitioner – Rishi alias Rishi Arora has filed petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 25 dated 06.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) under Section 87, 137(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 366 and 363 IPC)

registered at Police Station Kotwali Bathinda, District Bathinda.

2. As per the facts of case, complainant ‘AM’ gave his statement that he is working in private sector, having two daughters, elder daughter ‘Y’ aged about 15 years and younger daughter ‘D’ aged about 7 years. On 05.02.2026 at about 06:15 pm, his daughter ‘Y’ went for tuition but did not return home till late evening. He along with his family members started searching for her but could not locate her. They came to know that his daughter was taken away by Rishi Arora who used to live in their neighbourhood. She was enticed away by him on the pretext of marriage. With these allegations, present FIR has been registered.

During the course of investigation, victim was recovered on

07.02.2026 in the area of Bus Stand, Abohar. She was recovered and produced before Inspector Gurwinder Kaur and thereafter, she was produced before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda, where her statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS, 2023 and investigation in this case was started.

3. Learned counsel representing petitioner pointed out that allegations levelled against him are false. Statement of victim was recorded before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda on 07.02.2026 (Annexure R-1), where she did not level any allegation against petitioner. She further refused for her medical examination. Allegations levelled against petitioner are without any basis. He is ready to join investigation. Therefore, his anticipatory bail petition may be allowed.

4. Bail petition is opposed by learned counsel representing State. Detailed status report has been filed. Victim was recovered on 07.02.2026 and her statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS, 2023 before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda (Annexure R-1). It is conceded that she had refused for her medical examination. On 09.02.2026, custody of minor girl was handed over to her father in presence of members of Child Welfare Committee, Bathinda. Present petitioner is specifically named. Considering the facts and gravity of offence, he is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

5. I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record carefully. Victim involved in this case is a young girl of 15 years of age who left the house on 05.02.2026 and was recovered from the area of Bus Stand, Abohar on 07.02.2026. Statement of victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, 2023 before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda is Annexure R-1, where she conceded that she took lift from Rishi who alighted her at bus stand. As per version of victim, her parents had suspicion on Rishi and for this, he is named in FIR. Otherwise, she has not levelled any allegation against petitioner. However, fact remains that minor girl was taken away from lawful custody of her parents and was recovered after two days. Even from statement of victim, name of present petitioner has cropped up. Considering the facts and nature of allegations, petitioner is required to join investigation.

In the light of aforesaid factual position, I do not find a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner and petition filed by him is, accordingly dismissed.

6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well.

(AMARJOT BHATTI)

JUDGE

08.04.2026 lalit

W