CRM-M-22427- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (265) MANJINDER SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Sachdeva, Advocate, Mr. Kamal Jindal, Advocate and Mr. Amandeep Singh Punia, Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Utkrant Mahajan, Advocate for complainant *** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant petition 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking grant of anticipatory Sections 118(1), 115(2) of (Sections 117(2), 118(2) and 3(5) o Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur. 2. As per the allegations, on the night of 27.03.2026, a quarrel had taken place between Surinder Singh and Mohan Singh, co complainant Bhagwant of a plot. On the same night, when the complainant was going towards his -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision : MANJINDER SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Pradeep Virk, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Sachdeva, Advocate, Mr. Kamal Jindal, Advocate and Mr. Amandeep Singh Punia, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Utkrant Mahajan, Advocate for complainant *** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed by of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 30.03.2026 registered under Sections 118(1), 115(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) (Sections 117(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of BNS added later on) at Police Station Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur. As per the allegations, on the night of 27.03.2026, a quarrel had taken place between Surinder Singh and Mohan Singh, co complainant Bhagwant Singh, on account of some dispute qua giving possession of a plot. On the same night, when the complainant was going towards his IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22427-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Pradeep Virk, Senior Advocate with dvocate for the petitioner Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Utkrant Mahajan, Advocate for complainant has been filed by the petitioner under Section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking No.37 dated 30.03.2026 registered under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) f BNS added later on) at Police Station As per the allegations, on the night of 27.03.2026, a quarrel had taken place between Surinder Singh and Mohan Singh, co-villagers of f some dispute qua giving possession of a plot. On the same night, when the complainant was going towards his under Section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking No.37 dated 30.03.2026 registered under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) f BNS added later on) at Police Station As per the allegations, on the night of 27.03.2026, a quarrel had villagers of f some dispute qua giving possession of a plot. On the same night, when the complainant was going towards his AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22427- house, he was intercepted by the petitioner, who was accompanied with co accused Baljinder Singh, Balv persons unknown to him. The other co-accused. Petitioner gave Kirpan blow on the wrist of left arm of the complainant. The co complainant. On rais the spot. The injured complainant was taken to FIR, investigation proceedings have b petitioner moved an application fo dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 17.04.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a the complainant Bhagwan who had initiated the occurrence by petitioner. No injury had been caused by the petitioner to t he himself has suffered as many as six injuries at the hands of the complainant and his companions nature. There is not been explained satisfactorily. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned state co complainant has vehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are -2026 (O&M) 2 house, he was intercepted by the petitioner, who was accompanied with co accused Baljinder Singh, Balvir Singh, and their accomplices and some oth persons unknown to him. The complainant was assaulted by the petitioner and accused. Petitioner gave Kirpan blow on the wrist of left arm of the complainant. The co-accused Baljinder Singh also gave two fist blows to the complainant. On raising alarm, the petitioner and co injured complainant was taken to the FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 17.04.2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of version and cross the complainant Bhagwant Singh was the aggressor in this case, as it was he who had initiated the occurrence by coming out of his car and assailing the petitioner. No injury had been caused by the petitioner to t he himself has suffered as many as six injuries at the hands of the complainant companions. One of such injuries has been opined to be grievous in here is inordinate delay of three days in lodging of the FIR, which h not been explained satisfactorily. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. Per contra, learned state counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are house, he was intercepted by the petitioner, who was accompanied with co- r Singh, and their accomplices and some other complainant was assaulted by the petitioner and accused. Petitioner gave Kirpan blow on the wrist of left arm of the accused Baljinder Singh also gave two fist blows to the ing alarm, the petitioner and co-accused fled away from the hospital. After registration of een initiated. Apprehending his arrest, the r grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been case of version and cross-version. In fact, Singh was the aggressor in this case, as it was he out of his car and assailing the petitioner. No injury had been caused by the petitioner to the complainant, rather he himself has suffered as many as six injuries at the hands of the complainant . One of such injuries has been opined to be grievous in inordinate delay of three days in lodging of the FIR, which has not been explained satisfactorily. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. unsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are - er complainant was assaulted by the petitioner and accused. Petitioner gave Kirpan blow on the wrist of left arm of the accused Baljinder Singh also gave two fist blows to the accused fled away from hospital. After registration of een initiated. Apprehending his arrest, the r grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been version. In fact, Singh was the aggressor in this case, as it was he out of his car and assailing the he complainant, rather he himself has suffered as many as six injuries at the hands of the complainant . One of such injuries has been opined to be grievous in as not been explained satisfactorily. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is unsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that the allegations against the petitioner are AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22427- serious in nature. The injury on the person of the petitioner is a fabricated one. cross-case has been registered by way of DDR 117(2) has been deleted. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to allowed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 6. The petitioner in voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injury to the complainant Bhagwant Singh. Though a cross DDR had been registered, however, on of Annexure C1 and C2 revealed that the possibility of injury No. petitioner, which is claimed to be a grievous injury friendly hand, cannot be ruled out. It is also revealed from these reports that at the time of CT scan of the petitioner as on 29 found on his parietal bone. As such, it is a debatable question of law as to whether the petitioner had susta allegations against him proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstances of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameter set out for bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail, conviction and nature of evidence in support of the accusations are to be seen. That apart reasonable apprehensio with evidence or threatening the material witnesses is also to be weighed. -2026 (O&M) 3 serious in nature. The injury on the person of the petitioner is a fabricated one. case has been registered by way of DDR No has been deleted. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. The petitioner in connivance with the co voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injury to the complainant Singh. Though a cross DDR had been registered, however, on Annexure C1 and C2, which are reports given by a board of the possibility of injury No.3 on the person of the present petitioner, which is claimed to be a grievous injury friendly hand, cannot be ruled out. It is also revealed from these reports that at he time of CT scan of the petitioner as on 29-03 found on his parietal bone. As such, it is a debatable question of law as to whether the petitioner had sustained any injury in the incident or not? allegations against him are specific and serious in nature. proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstances of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameter set out for considering the application for grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail, conviction and nature of evidence in support of the accusations are to be seen. That apart reasonable apprehensio with evidence or threatening the material witnesses is also to be weighed. serious in nature. The injury on the person of the petitioner is a fabricated one. A No.30, but offence under section has been deleted. It is therefore argued that the petition deserves to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel nnivance with the co-accused is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injury to the complainant Singh. Though a cross DDR had been registered, however, on perusal , which are reports given by a board of doctors, it is 3 on the person of the present petitioner, which is claimed to be a grievous injury, being caused as a result of friendly hand, cannot be ruled out. It is also revealed from these reports that at 03-2026, no grievous injury was found on his parietal bone. As such, it is a debatable question of law as to ined any injury in the incident or not? The are specific and serious in nature. It is well settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstances of each case and there cannot considering the application for grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail, conviction and nature of evidence in support of the accusations are to be seen. That apart reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence or threatening the material witnesses is also to be weighed. A section be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel accused is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injury to the complainant perusal it is 3 on the person of the present being caused as a result of friendly hand, cannot be ruled out. It is also revealed from these reports that at 2026, no grievous injury was found on his parietal bone. As such, it is a debatable question of law as to The It is well settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstances of each case and there cannot considering the application for grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail, conviction and nature of evidence in support of the n of tampering with evidence or threatening the material witnesses is also to be weighed. AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22427- Frivolity of prosecution should also be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. at its nascent stage. the Investigating Agency, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see that an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant of pre in extra-ordinary and exceptional circumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra circumstance is, however, m Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. same is dismissed. 7. It is, however, clarified th be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. 8. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. 27.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 Frivolity of prosecution should also be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. at its nascent stage. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is deni the Investigating Agency, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see at an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant of pre-arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court inary and exceptional circumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. same is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been dismissed any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable:- Yes/No Frivolity of prosecution should also be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. The case is In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is denied to that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see at an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court inary and exceptional circumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra-ordinary ade out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the at the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Yes/No Frivolity of prosecution should also be considered and it is only the element of he case is ed to that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see at an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court inary and exceptional circumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the ordinary ade out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the Accordingly the at the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.