CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097 110 110 110 110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Maha Singh State of Punjab Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for P.C.) for grant of dated 06.08.2026 324(4), 115(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, 2. passed by the concerned rejected, reads thus: 51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 versus Punjab Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: September 10 September 10 September 10 September 10, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: September 10 September 10 September 10 September 10, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. J.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner .2026, registered for the offences punishable under 324(4), 115(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Jhunir, District Mansa. For the sake of ease, relevant factual passed by the concerned Sessions Court whereby plea of the reads thus: ““““6. From perusal of the police file, this Court finds that this case was registered on the statement of complainant Harjinder Singh son of Balvir Singh. In his statement, he has stated that he is agriculturist by profession. On 03.08.2026, at 7:45 p.m, he along with his brother Nirmal Singh was cutting green fodder from their fields for cattle. At that time, Maha Sngh son of Leela Singh, Gurpreet Singh son of Maha Singh and Gurpiar Singh son of Darshan Singh were coming on their tractor Swaraj 855 and it was being driven by Maha Singh. Gurpreet Singh and Gurpiar Singh were 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH 2026 2026 2026 2026 ….Petitioner ….Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL for the petitioner. Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya short ‘BNSS’) (erstwhile Section 438 Cr. bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.0125 ences punishable under Sections 109, at Police Station Jhunir, District Mansa. factual milieu drawn from the order Sessions Court whereby plea of the petitioner was From perusal of the police file, this Court finds that this case was registered on the statement of complainant Harjinder Singh son of Balvir Singh. In his statement, he has stated that he is agriculturist by profession. On 03.08.2026, at 7:45 p.m, he along with his brother Nirmal Singh was cutting green fodder from their fields for cattle. At that time, Maha Sngh son of Leela Singh, Gurpreet Singh son of Maha Singh and Gurpiar Singh son of Darshan Singh were coming on their tractor Swaraj 855 and it was ing driven by Maha Singh. Gurpreet Singh and Gurpiar Singh were 1111 Petitioner ….Respondent Bharatiya Section 438 Cr. 0125 109, drawn from the order petitioner was From perusal of the police file, this Court finds that this case was registered on the statement of complainant Harjinder Singh son of Balvir Singh. In his statement, he has stated that he is agriculturist by profession. g with his brother Nirmal Singh was cutting green fodder from their fields for cattle. At that time, Maha Sngh son of Leela Singh, Gurpreet Singh son of Maha Singh and Gurpiar Singh son of Darshan Singh were coming on their tractor Swaraj 855 and it was ing driven by Maha Singh. Gurpreet Singh and Gurpiar Singh were MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.10 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 sitting on the mudguards. On seeing him and his brother Nirmal Singh, Maha Singh stopped his tractor and these persons started abusing him and his brother Nirmal Singh and they were under the influence of liquor. Gurpiar Singh was armed with Kirpan and Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi was armed with iron Dah and out of fear, they had not said anything to the accused. After sometime, Maha Singh started his tractor and all these three persons while raising Lalkara and showing their weapons in air, started going towards their village. Due to fear, they even did not cut the fodder for cattle and even they left their tractor in the fields. Rather, taking their motorcycle bearing No.PB-31-1135 they started going towards their house in the village from another route. When they reached near the house of Pawan Singh son of Dharam Singh, then these three persons on their tractor were returning. Maha Singh hit his tractor with their motorcycle and due to which, they fell down on the ground. Maha Singh, with an intention to kill him, ran his tractor over him. Thereafter, Maha Singh stopped his tractor. Gurpiar Singh also came down from the tractor and Gurpiar Singh inflicted a Kirpan blow towards his head, which hit the left side of his head above his forehead and due to which, he became unconscious and fell down on the ground. Gopi Singh alias Gurpreet Singh was raising Lalkara. The driver of the tractor namely Maha Singh told Gurpreet Singh and Gurpiar Singh that complainant Harjinder Singh is finished and now look for Nirmal Singh. His brother Nirmal Singh raised raula of Marta-Marta. Many people started gathering there and thereafter, Maha Singh, Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi and Gurpiar Singh with their weapons, while raising Lalkaras went from the spot on their tractor Swaraj 855. He was taken to Government Hospital, Sardulgarh, from where he was referred to Civil Hospital, Mansa. The motive for the occurrence is that there was dispute regarding turn of water from the motor. On the basis of this statement, the present FIR was registered against accused/ applicants and others under Sections 109, 324(4), 115(2), 3(5) of BNS.”””” 3. Learned counsel has submitted that a bare perusal of the FIR would reveal that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are wholly concocted, improbable and devoid of any merits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further argued that no injury, is dangerous to life, has been received by the complainant and, therefore, no offence under Section 109 of the BNS is made out. It has also been submitted that dispute between the complainant and the co-accused pertains to use of the tube-well water connection. Learned counsel has further submitted that, as per the MLR, the injured sustained only one injury, which is simple in nature and caused by a blunt object, and is not such as would be likely to cause the death of a person. It has also been argued that there is MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.10 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 an unexplained delay of three days in lodging the FIR, which casts serious doubt on the prosecution version. 3.1. Learned counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation. It has been urged that no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, grant of the instant petition is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature. It has been further argued that investigation, in the present case, is still under way and the petitioner is yet to be arrested. Given the nature of allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable. It has been contended that, in case, the petitioner is accorded the concession of anticipatory bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice as also influence/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. Thus, the present petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. 6. As per the prosecution case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. A perusal of the prosecution case, as well as the material available on record, prima facie, reveals that the petitioner hit his tractor with motorcycle of the complainant-side and due to which, complainant-side fell down on the ground. As per prosecution case, it is further, prima facie, borne out that the petitioner, with an intention to kill, ran his tractor over the complainant. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is sought for recovery of the weapon of offence, as well as the tractor allegedly used in the commission of the offence. The MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.10 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner does not persuade this Court to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.1. The other pleas raised by the petitioner, including those of false implication etc., are matters to be adjudicated on the basis of evidence during the course of trial. Such disputed questions of fact(s) cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of consideration of the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail. 6.2. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. 7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that a prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and the preliminary investigation appear to establish reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. A profitable reference in this regard is being made to the dicta passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State State State State v. v. v. v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039, the Supreme Court held as under, relevant whereof reads as under: MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.10 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 5555 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----51097 51097 51097 51097----2026 2026 2026 2026 ““““6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well- ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.”””” 8. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that a prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record, the preliminary investigation and the nature of allegations, appear to establish a reasonable basis for his accusation. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual milieu of the case in hand. Moreover, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed dismissed. 9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 10 September 10 September 10 September 10, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.10 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment