Kuljeet Singh vs State of Punjab

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case vide FIR No.95 dated 06.06.2026, under Sections 305, 331(4) BNS, Police Station Khui Khera, District Fazilka. Sections 238, 317(2) BNS, 2023 added in the FIR during investigation. This is the first application for anticipatory bail.

Complainant Prem Kumar who worked as salesman in a liquor vend at village Keria alleged that the night before, he closed the liquor vend and went home. The next day, on 06.06.2026, when he came to the shop at 5:30 a.m., he saw back wall of the liquor vend broken. On checking different bottles of country made liquor and English liquor worth Rs.59,924/- were found stolen by some unknown persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated. He was not involved in the alleged theft. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. There was delay of 1 day in lodging FIR. Therefore, petitioner deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. On instructions from HC Amardeep Singh, he argues that petitioner was named as accused in supplementary statement of Prem Kumar, based on information given to him by Malkiat Singh that petitioner was seen roaming around at night, on a motor cycle near the liquor vend. Learned State counsel further submits that co-accused Lovepreet Singh was also arrested on supplementary statement of Prem Kumar and he too, disclosed name of petitioner. 766 bottles had been recovered from co-accused and custodial interrogation of petitioner was required as remaining bottles were yet to be recovered from petitioner.

Power under Section 482 BNSS is extraordinary in nature and cannot be exercised in routine, on mere asking. Concession of pre-arrest bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances, considering the nature and gravity of accusation, possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice and various other factors. Hence, the Court must exercise restraint and circumspection in such matters. Anticipatory bail cannot be claimed as of right and cannot be granted as a matter of rule, unless a clear case therefor is made out and exceptional circumstances are shown to exist.

Recoveries are to be effected and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessitated for just, proper and effective investigation to unearth the chain of events leading to commission of offence and to elicit useful information. There are no exceptional circumstances made out to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail. Grant of anticipatory bail in cases like the present one would amount to undue interference in the investigation which is not desirable.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition for anticipatory bail is dismissed.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.