CRM-M-25757 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT (201) Gursharan Singh State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE Present: NEERJA K. KALSON 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail 70(1), 61, 315, 3 of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 404 and 6 of IPC) vide rapat dated 13.07.2025, the sections were corrected to Sections 351(2) 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS 34 of IPC), at Police Station Jhabal, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P 2. has been falsely implicated in the present case and seeks parity with co accused Harjinder Kaur, who has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. 25757-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of Decision: Gursharan Singh Versus Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEERJA Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab. **** NEERJA K. KALSON, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 116 dated 12.07.2025 70(1), 61, 315, 3 of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 404 and 6 of IPC) vide rapat dated 13.07.2025, the sections were corrected s 351(2) 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS 34 of IPC), at Police Station Jhabal, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and seeks parity with co accused Harjinder Kaur, who has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25757-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.06.2026 ......PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT NEERJA K. KALSON Ranjeet Kumar Jaswal, Advocate Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking concession of 12.07.2025 registered under Sections 70(1), 61, 315, 3 of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 376(D), 120-B, 404 and 6 of IPC) vide rapat dated 13.07.2025, the sections were corrected s 351(2) 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS (corresponding to Section 506, 34 of IPC), at Police Station Jhabal, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P-2). counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and seeks parity with co accused Harjinder Kaur, who has already been granted the concession of ......PETITIONER The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the concession of registered under Sections B, 404 and 6 of IPC) vide rapat dated 13.07.2025, the sections were corrected (corresponding to Section 506, counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and seeks parity with co- accused Harjinder Kaur, who has already been granted the concession of ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI 2026.06.09 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25757-2026 (O&M) -2- 3. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the petition and submits that the allegations against the present petitioner are grave and serious in nature. It is argued that the prosecutrix has specifically named the petitioner and attributed a direct role to him in the commission of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that the investigation is still underway, one accused Varinder Singh is already in custody and other accused persons are yet to be apprehended and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the complete facts and circumstances of the case. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 5. The contention of the petitioner based on parity with co- accused Harjinder Kaur does not persuade this Court. The role attributed to the said co-accused is distinct and stands on a different footing. The prosecutrix has levelled specific and direct allegations against the present petitioner and has named him amongst the persons who allegedly subjected her to sexual assault. The nature and gravity of the allegations, therefore, cannot be equated with those attributed to the co-accused who has been granted anticipatory bail. 6. At this stage, the investigation is still in progress and the investigating agency has specifically asserted the requirement of custodial interrogation. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the stage of investigation and the role attributed to the petitioner, this Court is of the view that no case for grant of the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail is made out. 7. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI 2026.06.09 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25757-2026 (O&M) -3- 8. Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (NEERJA K. KALSON) JUDGE 08.06.2026 Atul 1. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether reportable Yes/No ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI 2026.06.09 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document