Yes — the Punjab & Haryana High Court (which sits at Chandigarh) regularly hears and decides pre-arrest bail (anticipatory bail) applications under the criminal procedure regime (currently BNSS 2023, similar in operation to old CrPC Section 438). Here’s a reliable summary of relevant case examples and principles from recent decisions:

HighCourt Bail Applications Punjab and Haryana

📌 Recent High Court Decisions on Pre-Arrest Bail (Anticipatory Bail) in Chandigarh

1. Grant of Interim Pre-Arrest Bail

  • The Court recently granted interim anticipatory bail to an accused in an assault case arising out of a neighborhood dispute, allowing him protection in the event of arrest while the petition is adjourned.

2. Grant of Interim Anticipatory Bail in Missing Saroop FIR

  • The High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to a 61-year-old accused in a case involving alleged unauthorised handling of holy scriptures, directing release upon arrest on furnishing bonds and compliance with investigative directions.

3. Refusal of Pre-Arrest Bail

  • In another recent matter, the High Court denied anticipatory bail where the alleged offence was seen as a threat to public order/communal peace, holding that exceptional relief was not warranted.

4. Denials in Serious Economic Offence Cases

  • The Court has also refused pre-arrest bail in high-profile corruption and economic offence cases (e.g., involving large public funds), emphasising gravity and prima facie evidence.

5. Challenged Grants of Anticipatory Bail

  • In Shinderpal Kaur v. State of Punjab & Anr., a High Court order granting anticipatory bail was set aside on appeal on grounds that bail was not warranted given the circumstances — showing the appellate scrutiny of such grants.

📌 Legal Principles Applicable in the High Court

🟢 Statutory Basis

  • Anticipatory bail is governed by Section 482 BNSS 2023 (analogous to Section 438 CrPC principles) — empowering the High Court to grant pre-arrest bail to persons fearing arrest in non-bailable offences.

🧠 Criteria Considered by the Court

Like in Supreme Court precedent (Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)), Punjab & Haryana High Court weighs:

  1. Nature and gravity of the offence
  2. Probability of evidence tampering / witness influence
  3. Antecedents of accused & criminal history
  4. Likelihood of fleeing from justice
  5. Whether bail would impede investigation

These criteria guide whether pre-arrest bail is appropriate in each case.

⚖️ Interim vs. Final Conditions

  • Courts often grant interim protection first (direction not to arrest pending full hearing) with conditions like bond, sureties, cooperation in investigation, non-interference with witnesses, etc.

📌 Practical Example Case Names / Situations (Chandigarh HC)

Case / Situation Order Type Key Considerations Interim anticipatory bail for assault accused (Sonipat) Interim pre-arrest bail Investigation ongoing, limited prima facie culpability Interim anticipatory bail in “missing saroop” FIR Interim pre-arrest bail Age of accused, documentary evidence gaps Denial in communal threat case Pre-arrest bail refused Seriousness, public order concerns Denial in corruption scam Pre-arrest bail refused Gravity of economic offence Shinderpal Kaur v. State of Punjab High Court anticipatory bail set aside on appeal Bail not warranted on facts; appellate review valid

📌 Supreme Court Principles Often Adopted

Although not specific to Chandigarh, the Punjab & Haryana High Court routinely follows Supreme Court guidelines on anticipatory bail, notably:

  • Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab — foundational anticipatory bail principles
  • Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) — anticipatory bail not to be given as blanket protection and conditions can be imposed

These shape how the High Court applies its discretion under Section 482 BNSS.