Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/12996/2026 of ARUN KUMAR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 23 July 2026
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-12996-2026 Date of decision :23.07.2026 ARUN KUMAR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Arjunveer Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adeshwar Pannu, Asstt.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-12996-2026
Date of decision :23.07.2026 ARUN KUMAR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Arjunveer Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adeshwar Pannu, Asstt. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Paras Khindri, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL) The prayer in the present petition under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 is for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana to respondent Nos.2 to 4 vide orders dated 05.02.2026 and 13.02.2026 in case FIR No.06 dated 12.01.2026 registered under Sections 304, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 324(4), 190 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 379, 323, 341, 506, 427, 149 of IPC) at Police Station Daba, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant contends that the anticipatory bails have been granted without proper appreciation of evidence inasmuch as the Gandasa, Kada, Purse and vehicle which ought to have been recovered have not been recovered and therefore, the anticipatory bails granted be cancelled. JITESH LAL 2026.07.24 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-12996-2026
3. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the kara, purse and the car have not been recovered pursuant to the disclosure statement of the petitioner, and, therefore, the offence under Section 201 IPC (Section 238 of BNS, 2023) has also been invoked.
4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 contends that in fact it is a case of road rage. The respondent Nos.2 to 4 have joined investigation. On account of non-recovery of the Kara, purse and car, Section 201 IPC (Section 238 of BNS, 2023) already stands invoked. Even if the bail is cancelled, the private respondents cannot be subjected to police remand now and no recovery can be effected so the present petition be dismissed.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Admittedly, the FIR came to be registered under Sections 304, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 324(4), 190 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 379, 323, 341, 506, 427, 149 of IPC), Police Station Daba, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana. The respondent Nos.2 to 4 have been granted the concession of bail vide orders dated 05.02.2026 and 13.02.2026 (Annexures P-3) respectively passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. As the recovery of the Kara, purse and car have not been effected, Section 201 IPC (Section 238 of BNS) already stands invoked.
7. In view of the above, the question of cancellation of bail of the private respondents does not arise. Therefore, the present petition stands dismissed.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 23.07.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No JITESH Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL 2026.07.24 15:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document