CRM-M-69394 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT 110 RAHUL STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : SURYA P 121(1), 109(1), 132, 190, 191(3), 221, 351(3) Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 No.255 dated Palwal. Since the case, and been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge 26.11.2025, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of of present petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM DATE OF DECISION VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Gulshan Nandwani, Advocate for Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana assisted by SI Badam Singh. SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J (ORAL) For the commission of offence 121(1), 109(1), 132, 190, 191(3), 221, 351(3) Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 13 of Punjab Gambli dated 21.10.2025 has been lodged in Police Station Since the petitioner is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case, and the application for anticipatory bail been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge .2025, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of of present petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-69394-2025(O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 13.01.2026 .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. r Aggarwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana For the commission of offence punishable under Section 121(1), 109(1), 132, 190, 191(3), 221, 351(3) and 304 of the Bharatiya 13 of Punjab Gambling Act, the FIR .2025 has been lodged in Police Station Sadar, District petitioner is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned application for anticipatory bail, filed by the petitioner, been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge Palwal vide order dated .2025, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of anticipatory bail by virtue of present petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by .01.2026 .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT punishable under Sections the Bharatiya the FIR , District petitioner is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned has vide order dated anticipatory bail by virtue of present petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-69394 invoking the provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 2. abovementioned FIR came into being had reported that regard to gambling in Village party headed by above police official, during the course of raid, were involved in gambling and on enquiry, the petitioner picked and hit the abovementioned police official. 3. place between the members of raiding party and the persons, who were involved in gambling and injuries were caused on the person officials. It is further case of the prosecution that information up. 4. 5. behalf of respondent 6. 7. the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that all the injuries suffered by the police officials are simple in nature. According to learned counsel for the petitioner 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 invoking the provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. Briefly stating the facts emerging from recor abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘SI Rasheed’, who had reported that in response to a tip-off received from an informer with regard to gambling in Village Pingore, a raid was conducted by a police party headed by above-named police official. police official, during the course of raid, were involved in gambling and on enquiry, the petitioner picked and hit the abovementioned police official. It is the case of the prosecution that thereafter a scuffle took place between the members of raiding party and the persons, who were involved in gambling and injuries were caused on the person officials. It is further case of the prosecution that information, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken Notice of motion. Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana behalf of respondent-State, and waives service. Heard. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that all the injuries suffered by the police officials are simple in nature. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the benefit of bail has already been 2 invoking the provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the ‘Bharatiya Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the at the instance of ‘SI Rasheed’, who off received from an informer with Pingore, a raid was conducted by a police amed police official. According to above-named police official, during the course of raid, it was found that 30-35 persons were involved in gambling and on enquiry, the petitioner picked-up a quarter and hit the abovementioned police official. he case of the prosecution that thereafter a scuffle took place between the members of raiding party and the persons, who were involved in gambling and injuries were caused on the person of police officials. It is further case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned , formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana appears on State, and waives service. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that all the injuries suffered by the police officials are simple in nature. According to , the benefit of bail has already been Bharatiya d are that the at the instance of ‘SI Rasheed’, who off received from an informer with Pingore, a raid was conducted by a police named 5 persons up a quarter he case of the prosecution that thereafter a scuffle took place between the members of raiding party and the persons, who were of police ew of abovementioned , formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken appears on It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that all the injuries suffered by the police officials are simple in nature. According to , the benefit of bail has already been GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-69394 accorded to the co Bajinder. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and therefore, he is entitled for benefit of anticipator bail. 8. abovementioned arguments. According to learned State Counsel, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was the first person, who had led the attack upon the police party and officials. other persons, who were involved in the interrogation of the petitioner is required. 9. 10. settled principles of law power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist extraordinary remedy. 11. case of Srikant Upadhyay v. observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held bail is a rule, it cannot; anticipatory bail is a rule. 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 accorded to the co-accused, namely Ishwar, Pawan, Mohan Lal and Bajinder. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and therefore, he is entitled for benefit of anticipator Per contra, the learned State Counsel has abovementioned arguments. According to learned State Counsel, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was the first person, who had led the attack upon the police party and inflicted injuries on the person of police officials. As per learned State Counsel, in order to ascertain the identity of other persons, who were involved in the interrogation of the petitioner is required. The record has been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is principles of law that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter . Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist extraordinary remedy. With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282 observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, anticipatory bail is a rule. 3 accused, namely Ishwar, Pawan, Mohan Lal and Bajinder. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and therefore, he is entitled for benefit of anticipator , the learned State Counsel has controverted the abovementioned arguments. According to learned State Counsel, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was the first person, who had led inflicted injuries on the person of police As per learned State Counsel, in order to ascertain the identity of other persons, who were involved in the commission of crime, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. s been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter . Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that by any stretch of imagination, be said that accused, namely Ishwar, Pawan, Mohan Lal and Bajinder. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and therefore, he is entitled for benefit of anticipatory controverted the abovementioned arguments. According to learned State Counsel, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was the first person, who had led inflicted injuries on the person of police As per learned State Counsel, in order to ascertain the identity of crime, custodial As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter be granted only when for the With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the , has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that be said that GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-69394 12. further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. 13. Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that antici exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. 14. 1980 SCC (2) 565 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when ca said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that antici exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punjab 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: (i) The power under Section 438, Criminal an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in exceptional cases only. (ii) In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. (iii) Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the 4 'ble Supreme Court in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punjab , the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that:- The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of ordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the stody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the mentioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. lled upon to exercise the said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special the patory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punjab Procedure Code, is of ordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the stody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-69394 15. custodial interrogation of Investiga present case, if such right is den result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation headway. 16. petitioner are for the commission of offence punishable under Section 109(1) of BNS, i.e. causing injury with an intention to kill the police officials, who were performing their duty, it is hereby gravity of offence the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of anticipatory bail. 17. concerned, a perusal of record shows that co benefit o anticipatory bail was ever afforded to the co 18. abovementioned circumstances bail by this Court 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Sec exercised. It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of custodial interrogation of Investigating Agency is a valuable right present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation Keeping in view the fact that the allegations against the petitioner are for the commission of offence punishable under Section 109(1) of BNS, i.e. causing injury with an intention to kill the police officials, who were performing their duty, it is hereby gravity of offence the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of anticipatory As far as the plea with regard to grant of bail to co concerned, a perusal of record shows that co benefit of regular bail by the Court of Sessions, and no benefit of anticipatory bail was ever afforded to the co If the fact-situation of instant case abovementioned observations, it transpires that cumstances, warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory bail by this Court, exists in the instant case 5 investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of ting Agency is a valuable right and in the ied to the Investigating Agency it is likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a proper Keeping in view the fact that the allegations against the petitioner are for the commission of offence punishable under Section 109(1) of BNS, i.e. causing injury with an intention to kill the police officials, who were performing their duty, it is hereby held that in view of gravity of offence the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of anticipatory As far as the plea with regard to grant of bail to co-accused is concerned, a perusal of record shows that co-accused were afforded the f regular bail by the Court of Sessions, and no benefit of anticipatory bail was ever afforded to the co-accused. situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of , it transpires that no such exceptional warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory case. Thus, it is hereby held that the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can tion 438 should not be It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of and in the it is likely to may not take a proper Keeping in view the fact that the allegations against the petitioner are for the commission of offence punishable under Section 109(1) of BNS, i.e. causing injury with an intention to kill the police held that in view of gravity of offence the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of anticipatory accused is accused were afforded the f regular bail by the Court of Sessions, and no benefit of is analyzed in the light of no such exceptional warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory that the GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-69394 present petition same is hereby 19. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 20. application Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 69394-2025(O&M) 8587 petition is devoid of merits deserve hereby dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 6 deserves dismissal. Accordingly, the It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending rendered infructuous. :Yes/No : Yes/No . Accordingly, the It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document