CRM-M-34007- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (103) SURINDER SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mr. Lalit Bhardwaj, Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab Mr. MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of anticipatory registered under Sections 115(2), 190, 191(3), 126(2) and 281 of Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) later on) at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala. 2. The aforementioned FIR was recorded by the complainant Jagdeep Singh alleging that on 26.09.2025, he alongwith his family members was standing in a street opposite to his house -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH SURINDER SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Jatin Anand Dwivedi, Advocate and Mr. Lalit Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab Mr. Angrej Singh Sarwara, Advocate for **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No. registered under Sections 115(2), 190, 191(3), 126(2) and 281 of Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) (Sections 117(2) and 110 of BNS added later on) at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of recorded by the complainant Jagdeep Singh alleging that on 26.09.2025, he alongwith his family members was standing in a street opposite to his house IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34007-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 02.07.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Jatin Anand Dwivedi, Advocate and Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab , Advocate for the complainant preferred by the petitioner under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) in case arising out of FIR No.101 dated 27.09.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 190, 191(3), 126(2) and 281 of Bharatiya (Sections 117(2) and 110 of BNS added later on) at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala. registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Jagdeep Singh alleging that on 26.09.2025, he alongwith his family members was standing in a street opposite to his house (O&M) 2026 .. Petitioner ...Respondent under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) 101 dated 27.09.2025 Bharatiya (Sections 117(2) and 110 of BNS added statement recorded by the complainant Jagdeep Singh alleging that on 26.09.2025, he alongwith his family members was standing in a street opposite to his house AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-34007- when at about 07;50 PM, accused Bikram Singh reached there in a car turned the same towards his brother Navjot Singh, who had a narrow escape as he saved himself by being on a side. Navjot Singh took brick same towards the car of Bikram Singh thereafter, the acc accused, being armed with weapons reached at the spot and opened an assault by laying down Hoshiar Singh, uncle of the complainant on the floor. The petitioner struck a blow another blow on the hand of Hansvir Singh, cousin of the complainant. Accused Bikram struck blow with gandasi on the uncle of the complainant and the remaining accused also caused injuries with their respective weapons person and then they fled from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. On 27.09.2025, a cross Hoshiar Singh and some other persons on the complaint of the present petitioner. Apprehending his grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala vide order dated 12.03.2026. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has falsely implicated in this case. The co similar allegations were levelled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the same benefit. His investigation. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. -2026 (O&M) 2 when at about 07;50 PM, accused Bikram Singh reached there in a car turned the same towards his brother Navjot Singh, who had a narrow escape as he saved himself by being on a side. Navjot Singh took brick same towards the car of Bikram Singh, who ran away from the spot. Sometime the accused Bikram Singh accompanied b being armed with weapons reached at the spot and opened an assault by laying down Hoshiar Singh, uncle of the complainant on the floor. The petitioner struck a blow of rod on the head of Hosh another blow on the hand of Hansvir Singh, cousin of the complainant. Accused Bikram struck blow with gandasi on the uncle of the complainant and the remaining accused also caused injuries with their respective weapons and then they fled from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. On 27.09.2025, a cross Hoshiar Singh and some other persons on the complaint of the present . 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, Patiala vide order dated 12.03.2026. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has falsely implicated in this case. The co-accused Bikram Singh against whom similar allegations were levelled, has been extended benefit of anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the His custodial interrogation is not required. investigation. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. when at about 07;50 PM, accused Bikram Singh reached there in a car and turned the same towards his brother Navjot Singh, who had a narrow escape as he saved himself by being on a side. Navjot Singh took brick bat and threw the who ran away from the spot. Sometime used Bikram Singh accompanied by the petitioner and co- being armed with weapons reached at the spot and opened an assault by laying down Hoshiar Singh, uncle of the complainant on the floor. The of rod on the head of Hoshiar Singh and then gave another blow on the hand of Hansvir Singh, cousin of the complainant. Accused Bikram struck blow with gandasi on the uncle of the complainant and the remaining accused also caused injuries with their respective weapons on the and then they fled from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. On 27.09.2025, a cross-case was registered against Hoshiar Singh and some other persons on the complaint of the present arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala vide order dated 12.03.2026. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been accused Bikram Singh against whom has been extended benefit of anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the custodial interrogation is not required. He is ready to join investigation. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. and turned the same towards his brother Navjot Singh, who had a narrow escape as bat and threw the who ran away from the spot. Sometime - being armed with weapons reached at the spot and opened an assault by laying down Hoshiar Singh, uncle of the complainant on the floor. The iar Singh and then gave another blow on the hand of Hansvir Singh, cousin of the complainant. Accused Bikram struck blow with gandasi on the uncle of the complainant and the on the and then they fled from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation case was registered against Hoshiar Singh and some other persons on the complaint of the present arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of Learned been accused Bikram Singh against whom has been extended benefit of anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the He is ready to join AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-34007- 4. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant while relying upon the s there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. His case cannot be stated to be at parity with the case of co allegations against him are much graver. He had caused in persons. The injury sustained by the victim Hansvir Singh has not only been opined to be grievous but also dangerous in nature. This injury was on the vital part being comminuted depressed fracture of left parietal bone seen with maximum displacement. For the purpose of conducting investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. No exceptional or extra-ordinary circumstance for grant of bail is made out in favour of the petitioner. It is thus, argued 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 6. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co thereof injuries were caused upon the person of victim Hansvir Singh, Hoshiar Singh, Bhola Singh and Karanvir Singh. The pe caused injuries on the head of Hoshiar Singh and Hansvir Singh. The injury sustained by Hansvir Singh has been opined to be dangerous in nature. settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief 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 -2026 (O&M) 3 Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. His case cannot be stated to be at parity with the case of co allegations against him are much graver. He had caused in persons. The injury sustained by the victim Hansvir Singh has not only been opined to be grievous but also dangerous in nature. This injury was on the vital part being comminuted depressed fracture of left parietal bone seen with displacement. For the purpose of conducting investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. No exceptional or ordinary circumstance for grant of bail is made out in favour of the petitioner. It is thus, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common object thereof injuries were caused upon the person of victim Hansvir Singh, Hoshiar Singh, Bhola Singh and Karanvir Singh. The pe caused injuries on the head of Hoshiar Singh and Hansvir Singh. The injury sustained by Hansvir Singh has been opined to be dangerous in nature. settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief 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 Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the tatus report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. His case cannot be stated to be at parity with the case of co-accused Bikram Singh as the allegations against him are much graver. He had caused injuries to three persons. The injury sustained by the victim Hansvir Singh has not only been opined to be grievous but also dangerous in nature. This injury was on the vital part being comminuted depressed fracture of left parietal bone seen with displacement. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. No exceptional or ordinary circumstance for grant of bail is made out in favour of the that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an accused and in prosecution of common object thereof injuries were caused upon the person of victim Hansvir Singh, Hoshiar Singh, Bhola Singh and Karanvir Singh. The petitioner is alleged to have caused injuries on the head of Hoshiar Singh and Hansvir Singh. The injury sustained by Hansvir Singh has been opined to be dangerous 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 be any exhaustive parameter set out for considering the application for Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the tatus report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. His case cannot accused Bikram Singh as the juries to three persons. The injury sustained by the victim Hansvir Singh has not only been opined to be grievous but also dangerous in nature. This injury was on the vital part being comminuted depressed fracture of left parietal bone seen with thorough and proper investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. No exceptional or ordinary circumstance for grant of bail is made out in favour of the This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an accused and in prosecution of common object thereof injuries were caused upon the person of victim Hansvir Singh, Hoshiar titioner is alleged to have caused injuries on the head of Hoshiar Singh and Hansvir Singh. The injury It is well 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 AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-34007- 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. Frivolity of prosecution shou genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. at its nascent stage. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant of pre-arrest bail are to be exerci 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 made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the same is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no on the merits of the case. 8. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. 02.07.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment e 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. 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. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court in extra 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-ordinar made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this rt is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the same is dismissed. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment e 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. ld 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 at its nascent stage. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant sed by the Court 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 ordinary circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this rt is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment e 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. ld also be considered and it is only the element of The case is at its nascent stage. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant 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 y circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this rt is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for bearing , pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.03 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.