Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/5420/2026 of MANOJ KHANNA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 21 August 2026
of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 220 ***** CRM-M No.5420 of 2026 Date of decision : 21.8.2026 Date of uploading : 21.8.2026 Manoj Khanna ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
220
*****
CRM-M No.5420 of 2026
Date of decision : 21.8.2026
Date of uploading : 21.8.2026
Manoj Khanna
………….Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
…….Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Mr. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan S. Rai, Senior DAG, Punjab
---
SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. On 18.2.2026, the following order was passed: ‘Status report by way of affidavit of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, filed in the Court, is taken on record. Learned counsel contends that name of the petitioner surfaced based on the disclosure statement of co-accused, Gurmukh Singh. As a matter of fact, he being an advocate, was approached by the the aforesaid co- accused to fill out passport application form in the premises of District Court, Lakhimpur Khiri (U.P), where the Suvidha Centre is situated. He acted purely in his professional capacity and in good faith, but has been falsely implicated in the present case. No recovery is to be effected from him. He is not involved in any other case of similar offence; ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate. Adjourned to 09.03.2026.
Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation on or before 26.02.2026. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. However, it is clarified that if the petitioner does not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.’
2. Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 18.2.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation but his custodial interrogation is required to unearth the entire details/conspiracy involved in the offence(s) in question.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, especially keeping in view the factum that the petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is sought only to unearth the entire details/conspiracy involved in the offence(s) in question; this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 18.2.2026.
4. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. The interim order dated 18.2.2026, passed by this Court is hereby confirmed, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
5. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read as granting petitioner 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. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.
7. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE 21.8.2026 Ashwanii
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable:
Yes/No