High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 P&H CK 0133

Kulwinder Singh @ Karanveer vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 2 September 2026 · Citation: 2026:PHHC:123223

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manisha Batra, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M-40593-2026 (O&M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 426 words

MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)

1.

Through the instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.38 dated 31.05.2026 registered under Sections 109, 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) at Police Station Dharamgarh, District Sangrur. On oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner offence under Section 238 of BNS is ordered to be added in the headnote as well as prayer clause of the petition.

2.

Vide order dated 04.08.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner was released on interim bail and was directed to join investigation.

3.

Learned State counsel filed status report dated 31.08.2026 and on instructions states that the petitioner has joined the investigation on 08.08.2026 but has not cooperated with the investigating agency since he has not got effected the recovery of the weapon of offence used by him at the time of occurrence, therefore, his custodial interrogation is required.

4.

This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

5.

The petitioner has joined investigation on 08.08.2026. So far as the non recovery is concerned, mere non recovery cannot by itself be a ground for denial of bail as has also been observed by the Delhi High Court in case titled as ‘Jagdish Thakkar vs. State of Delhi’, 1992 (3) CCR 2764’ and in case titled as ‘Pooran Singh vs. State of Delhi’, 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 503. With regard to contention that the petitioner has not co-operated with the investigation, it may be stated that the behavior attributed to the petitioner cannot be considered as an instance of non-cooperation, justifying denial for grant of pre-arrest bail since, an accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. It is well settled that the purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to compulsorily divulge self-incriminating information. In the instant case, the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 04.08.2026 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of BNSS.

6.

Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous.