Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2023 DAILYLAW 4212 (PNJ)

AKRAM v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/16718/2026 · 2026-04-30

Rupinderjit Chahal

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-16718 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 218(1) AKRAM STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. Present:- Mr. Vipan Kumar Sharma, for the petitioner Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. S.K. Rohilla, for the complainant. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 2023 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural 2. On the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya 16718-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Vipan Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. S.K. Rohilla, Advocate for the complainant. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 2023 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural. On 01.04.2026, the following order “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16718-2026 Date of decision: 30.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Advocate, Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, following order was passed by this Court: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dated 28.07.2024 registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya GURPREET 2026.05.01 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16718 Sanhita, 20 Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural. petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said occurrence took place on 21.07.2024 but the FIR in question was registered on 28.07.2024 i.e. after an unexplained delay of 07 days, casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He argued that the petitioner was not commission of offence. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the injury attributed to the petitioner is on the non on the left kn was added by the prosecution only to make the offence graver. He further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant have amicably resolved their dispute and entered into a compromise (Annexure P the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent time to file status report in the matter. appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his Memo of Appearan compromise and submits that he has no objection if the present petition is allowed. investigation within a week from today a when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be 16718-2026 2 Sanhita, 2023 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said incident. He argued that the alleged occurrence took place on 21.07.2024 but the FIR in question was registered on 28.07.2024 i.e. after an unexplained delay of 07 days, casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He argued that the petitioner was not even present on the spot at the time of commission of offence. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the injury attributed to the petitioner is on the non-vital part of the body of complainant i.e. on the left knee. He further argued that Section 118(2) of BNS was added by the prosecution only to make the offence graver. He further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant have amicably resolved their dispute and entered into a compromise (Annexure P-3). No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent time to file status report in the matter. At this stage, Mr. S.K. Rohilla, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his Memo of Appearance, which is taken on record. He affirms the factum of compromise and submits that he has no objection if the present petition is allowed. Adjourned to 18.04.2026. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today a when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be 23 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar Rural. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he incident. He argued that the alleged occurrence took place on 21.07.2024 but the FIR in question was registered on 28.07.2024 i.e. after an unexplained delay of 07 days, casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He argued even present on the spot at the time of commission of offence. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the injury attributed to the vital part of the body of complainant i.e. ee. He further argued that Section 118(2) of BNS was added by the prosecution only to make the offence graver. He further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant have amicably resolved their dispute and entered into a o recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. t, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and seeks time to file status report in the matter. At this stage, Mr. S.K. Rohilla, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his Memo of ce, which is taken on record. He affirms the factum of compromise and submits that he has no objection if the present In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be 23 (Section 118(2) of the BNS added later on), at Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he incident. He argued that the alleged occurrence took place on 21.07.2024 but the FIR in question was registered on 28.07.2024 i.e. after an unexplained delay of 07 days, casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He argued even present on the spot at the time of commission of offence. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the injury attributed to the vital part of the body of complainant i.e. ee. He further argued that Section 118(2) of BNS was added by the prosecution only to make the offence graver. He further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant have amicably resolved their dispute and entered into a o recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and t, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, State and seeks At this stage, Mr. S.K. Rohilla, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his Memo of ce, which is taken on record. He affirms the factum of compromise and submits that he has no objection if the present In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join nd would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be GURPREET 2026.05.01 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16718 admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Of shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 3. However, the petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 01.04.2026 and did not join the investigation. Subsequently, vide order dated 18.04.2026, another opportunity was granted to the petitioner, upon his request, to join the investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the orders dated petitioner has joined the investigation. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions Ramandeep Singh, investigation and 6. Learned counsel appearing fo offence committed by petitioner is serious in nature and hence, opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner 7. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS 30.04.2026 Gurpreet 16718-2026 3 admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Of shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” However, the petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 01.04.2026 and did not join the investigation. Subsequently, vide order dated .2026, another opportunity was granted to the petitioner, upon his request, to join the investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of dated 01.04.2026 and 18.04.2026 joined the investigation. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions Ramandeep Singh, has submitted that the petitioner ha investigation and is no longer required for further investigation. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the offence committed by petitioner is serious in nature and hence, opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 01.04.2026 passed by this C petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section However, the petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 01.04.2026 and did not join the investigation. Subsequently, vide order dated .2026, another opportunity was granted to the petitioner, upon his Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of 18.04.2026 passed by this Court, the Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Insp. has submitted that the petitioner has joined the no longer required for further investigation. r the complainant submits that the offence committed by petitioner is serious in nature and hence, opposes the In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the passed by this Court, is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the ficer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section However, the petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 01.04.2026 and did not join the investigation. Subsequently, vide order dated .2026, another opportunity was granted to the petitioner, upon his Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of passed by this Court, the from Insp. joined the r the complainant submits that the offence committed by petitioner is serious in nature and hence, opposes the In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the ourt, is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.05.01 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.