CRM-M-10550 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 296 Sunny Kumar @ Sunny State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. petitioner under Section short ‘BNSS’) 21.08.2024 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) [Sections 115, 117(2) and 118(2) of BNS added later on] District Jalandhar. dismissed as withdrawn on 11.02.2025, with liberty to file a disclosing complete antecedents of the petit 2. petition are that the aforementioned FIR has been registered on the basis of the statement got recorded by complainant Akashdeep Singh that on the night of 19.08 while he was riding an activ and had opened assault upon him. Accused Janu struck a blow with a 10550-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sunny Kumar @ Sunny Versus State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA Mr. Varun Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The instant one is the second under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik short ‘BNSS’) seeking grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 21.08.2024, registered under Sections 109(2), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) [Sections 115, 117(2) and 118(2) of BNS added later on] District Jalandhar. The first petition, bearing CRM dismissed as withdrawn on 11.02.2025, with liberty to file a disclosing complete antecedents of the petit Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that the aforementioned FIR has been registered on the basis of the statement got recorded by complainant Akashdeep Singh that on the night of 19.08.2024, accused Janu and Arun had intercepted h while he was riding an activa vehicle. They had pulled the key of his vehicle and had opened assault upon him. Accused Janu struck a blow with a IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10550-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.04.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the tiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 199, dated 109(2), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) [Sections 115, 117(2) and 118(2) of BNS added later on] at Police Station Rama Mandi, The first petition, bearing CRM-M-7717-2025, was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.02.2025, with liberty to file a fresh one while disclosing complete antecedents of the petitioner. Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that the aforementioned FIR has been registered on the basis of the statement got recorded by complainant Akashdeep Singh alleging therein .2024, accused Janu and Arun had intercepted h vehicle. They had pulled the key of his vehicle and had opened assault upon him. Accused Janu struck a blow with a -1- 2025 (O&M) 07.04.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent by the (for , dated 109(2), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) [Sections 115, Station Rama Mandi, 2025, was while Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that the aforementioned FIR has been registered on the basis of alleging therein .2024, accused Janu and Arun had intercepted him vehicle. They had pulled the key of his vehicle and had opened assault upon him. Accused Janu struck a blow with a MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10550 Gandasi, thereby injuring his left hand. Accused Arun hit his baseball. They had come in a car. The present petitioner and co Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan a baseball, whereas a blow with a head of the complainant His sisters were attracted at the spot on hearing clamo save the complainant and then the assailants to the assailants was that some days back, they had misbehaved with the sister of the compl complainant had stopped them from doing so. After registration of FIR, investigation pro Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court of learned Jalandhar but the same has been dismissed, vide order date 3. argued by his counsel that petitioner was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence and has been implicated in this case due to political pressure being exerted by the complainant. which has complainant party has enmity with co petitioner, being their friend ready to join the investigation. No recovery is to be e custodial interrogation is not required. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner into custody. 10550-2025 (O&M) , thereby injuring his left hand. Accused Arun hit his baseball. They had come in a car. The present petitioner and co Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan had then alighted from the said car and Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan struck a blow on the back of the complainant with a baseball, whereas a blow with a datar head of the complainant. Thereafter, they started extending beatings to him. His sisters were attracted at the spot on hearing clamo save the complainant and then the assailants to the assailants was that some days back, they had misbehaved with the sister of the complainant, while she was going complainant had stopped them from doing so. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court of learned Jalandhar but the same has been dismissed, vide order date The present petition has been filed on the grounds and it has been argued by his counsel that he has been falsely implicated in this case. petitioner was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence and has been implicated in this case due to political pressure being exerted by the complainant. There is delay of two days in reporting the matter to the police, has created a serious dent in the story of the complainant. In fact the complainant party has enmity with co- petitioner, being their friend, has been falsely implicated in this case. He is ready to join the investigation. No recovery is to be e custodial interrogation is not required. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner into custody. , thereby injuring his left hand. Accused Arun hit his chest with a baseball. They had come in a car. The present petitioner and co-accused had then alighted from the said car and struck a blow on the back of the complainant with was given by the petitioner on the . Thereafter, they started extending beatings to him. His sisters were attracted at the spot on hearing clamour and reached there to save the complainant and then the assailants fled away. The motive attributed to the assailants was that some days back, they had misbehaved with the sister ainant, while she was going in an Activa vehicle and the complainant had stopped them from doing so. After registration of FIR, ceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar but the same has been dismissed, vide order dated 27.12.2024. The present petition has been filed on the grounds and it has been he has been falsely implicated in this case. petitioner was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence and has been implicated in this case due to political pressure being exerted by the There is delay of two days in reporting the matter to the police, ous dent in the story of the complainant. In fact the -accused Janu and Arun and the , has been falsely implicated in this case. He is ready to join the investigation. No recovery is to be effected from him. His custodial interrogation is not required. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner into custody. Co-accused Sanchit @ Janu and -2- chest with a accused had then alighted from the said car and struck a blow on the back of the complainant with on the . Thereafter, they started extending beatings to him. r and reached there to e motive attributed to the assailants was that some days back, they had misbehaved with the sister Activa vehicle and the complainant had stopped them from doing so. After registration of FIR, way. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of Additional Sessions Judge, The present petition has been filed on the grounds and it has been he has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence and has been implicated in this case due to political pressure being exerted by the There is delay of two days in reporting the matter to the police, ous dent in the story of the complainant. In fact the accused Janu and Arun and the , has been falsely implicated in this case. He is ffected from him. His custodial interrogation is not required. No useful purpose would be served by accused Sanchit @ Janu and MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10550 Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan have already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by th deserves the same benefit. allowed. 4. Police, Sub State. It is submitted therein and learned State counsel has argued that petitioner has causing him grievous injuries, life. The petitioner along with co had caused as many as six injuries on his person. His custodial interrogation is required for conducting proper investigation in the matter by the police. The allegations against h the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. and have also gone through the record carefully. 6. with the co to the victim/complainant as on 19.08.2024. The complainant had sustained simple as well as grievous injuries. head injury with a found to be dangerous to life. criminal case registered against him under Sections 323, 324, 506, 326, 201, 148 and 149 of IPC. quite serious. the matter. No extraordinary and sparing circumstance has been made out in 10550-2025 (O&M) Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan have already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. On the grounds of parity, the petitioner too deserves the same benefit. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be Status report by way of affidavit of Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sub-Division Central, Jalandhar, State. It is submitted therein and learned State counsel has argued that petitioner has given a datar blow on the head of the complainant, thereby causing him grievous injuries, some of which The petitioner along with co-accused had assaulted the complainant and had caused as many as six injuries on his person. His custodial interrogation is required for conducting proper investigation in the matter by the police. The allegations against him are quite serious in nature. Therefore, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. As per the allegations, the petitioner by hatching a conspiracy with the co-accused and in furtherance of that conspiracy to the victim/complainant as on 19.08.2024. The complainant had sustained simple as well as grievous injuries. The petitioner is alleged to ha head injury with a datar on the person of the complainant, which has been found to be dangerous to life. He is shown to be involved in one more criminal case registered against him under Sections 323, 324, 506, 326, 201, 148 and 149 of IPC. The allegations against the petitioner are quite serious. His custodial interrogation is required the matter. No extraordinary and sparing circumstance has been made out in Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan have already been granted concession of is Court. On the grounds of parity, the petitioner too Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be by way of affidavit of Assistant Commissioner of Division Central, Jalandhar, has been filed by the respondent State. It is submitted therein and learned State counsel has argued that blow on the head of the complainant, thereby some of which were found to be dangerous to accused had assaulted the complainant and had caused as many as six injuries on his person. His custodial interrogation is required for conducting proper investigation in the matter by the police. The im are quite serious in nature. Therefore, it is urged that I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. petitioner by hatching a conspiracy accused and in furtherance of that conspiracy, had caused injuries to the victim/complainant as on 19.08.2024. The complainant had sustained The petitioner is alleged to have caused a on the person of the complainant, which has been He is shown to be involved in one more criminal case registered against him under Sections 323, 324, 506, 326, 201, allegations against the petitioner are specific and custodial interrogation is required for proper investigation in the matter. No extraordinary and sparing circumstance has been made out in -3- Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan have already been granted concession of is Court. On the grounds of parity, the petitioner too Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be by way of affidavit of Assistant Commissioner of been filed by the respondent- State. It is submitted therein and learned State counsel has argued that the blow on the head of the complainant, thereby were found to be dangerous to accused had assaulted the complainant and had caused as many as six injuries on his person. His custodial interrogation is required for conducting proper investigation in the matter by the police. The im are quite serious in nature. Therefore, it is urged that I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length petitioner by hatching a conspiracy caused injuries to the victim/complainant as on 19.08.2024. The complainant had sustained ve caused a on the person of the complainant, which has been He is shown to be involved in one more criminal case registered against him under Sections 323, 324, 506, 326, 201, specific and for proper investigation in the matter. No extraordinary and sparing circumstance has been made out in MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10550 favour of the petitioner for grant of pre proposition of law is that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigatio tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses. The powers under Section 482 of BNSS circumstances. More so, custodial interrogation of a suspected person is qualitatively more elicitation ori ensconced with a favourable order under Section information can be disinterred during custodial interrogation. It has also to be seen that an order of anticipatory bail does not operate legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. petitioner regarding parity with aforesaid co the petitioner is not at parity with them at all. as made above, I am of the considered opinion that no extraordinary or sparing circumstance entitling the petitioner to seek concession of pre bail has been made out rather thorough investigation merit, the petition is dismissed. 7. for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expressi 07.04.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 10550-2025 (O&M) favour of the petitioner for grant of pre proposition of law is that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigatio tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses. The powers under 482 of BNSS are to be exercised in extraordinary and sparing circumstances. More so, custodial interrogation of a suspected person is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section information can be disinterred during custodial interrogation. It has also to be seen that an order of anticipatory bail does not operate legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. petitioner regarding parity with aforesaid co the petitioner is not at parity with them at all. as made above, I am of the considered opinion that no extraordinary or sparing circumstance entitling the petitioner to seek concession of pre bail has been made out rather his custodial interrogation is required for thorough investigation in the matter by the police. Accordingly, finding no merit, the petition is dismissed. 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. 07.04.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable favour of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail. The well settled proposition of law is that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigatio tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses. The powers under are to be exercised in extraordinary and sparing circumstances. More so, custodial interrogation of a suspected person is ented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 482 of BNSS. Many useful information can be disinterred during custodial interrogation. It has also to be seen that an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. So far as the claim of the petitioner regarding parity with aforesaid co-accused is concerned, the case of the petitioner is not at parity with them at all. Keeping in view the discussion as made above, I am of the considered opinion that no extraordinary or sparing circumstance entitling the petitioner to seek concession of pre-arrest custodial interrogation is required for in the matter by the police. Accordingly, finding no 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 on of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No -4- The well settled proposition of law is that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses. The powers under are to be exercised in extraordinary and sparing circumstances. More so, custodial interrogation of a suspected person is ented than questioning a suspect who is well . Many useful information can be disinterred during custodial interrogation. It has also to be as inroad in the normal So far as the claim of the accused is concerned, the case of iscussion as made above, I am of the considered opinion that no extraordinary or arrest custodial interrogation is required for in the matter by the police. Accordingly, finding no 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 MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document