CRM-M-51230-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 104 CRM-M-51230-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.09.2025 Amarjit Singh Samra ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Rahi Mehra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to him in case bearing FIR No. 57 dated 15.09.2019, registered under Sections 302, 148 and 149 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sarai Amant Khan, District Tarn Taran. The previous petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 03.08.2023. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the allegations that on 15.09.2019, victims Amandeep Singh @ Aman and his wife Amanpreet Kaur were going towards their house on a motorbike after paying obeisance at Gurdwara Baba Buddha Sahib Ji. Complainant Harmanjit Singh @ Hamma was following them on a separate motorbike. While on the way, they were intercepted by the present petitioner and co-accused Surjit Singh Gurbhinder MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.15 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-51230-2025 (O&M) -2- Singh, who were accompanied 4-5 persons. They had opened an assault upon the victims, fired shots at them with fire arms, had forcibly shifted both of them in their car and had thrown their dead bodies on the way. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. A detailed inquiry was conducted and the present petitioner as well as Mewa Singh and Surjit Singh, named as accused, were declared to be innocent. Their names were kept in Column No. 2 of the challan report. Learned Sessions Judge subsequently summoned the petitioner and said persons as additional accused while exercising powers under Section 193 of Cr.P.C. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner sought grant of pre-arrest bail, which was firstly declined by the Sessions Court and then by this Court, vide order dated 03.08.2023. Even a petition for leave to appeal had been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 24.06.2024. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the second petition for grant of pre-arrest bail is maintainable. The only ground which has been taken by the petitioner in this petition is that the identically placed co-accused Mewa Singh and Surjit Singh have been extended benefit of pre-arrest bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 12.07.2024 (Annexure P-6). Claiming parity with them, the petitioner has prayed for exercising powers under Section 482 of BNSS and to extend benefit of pre-arrest bail to him as well. 4. Learned State counsel has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter. It is submitted by him that since the prayer made by the petitioner has already been declined even by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, hence, no ground is made out to grant him concession of pre-arrest bail and the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.15 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-51230-2025 (O&M) -3- petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also perused the material placed on record. 6. There is no dispute that a second application for grant of pre-arrest bai is maintainable. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case when the prayer of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail has already been declined by this Court as well as by Hon’ble Supreme Court, I find no reason to exercise the powers under Section 482 of BNSS and to grant concession of pre-arrest bail to him. Accordingly, finding no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 12.09.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.15 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document