CRM-M-10438-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 210/2 CRM-M-10438-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.04.2025 Chaina Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Sham Lal Saha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Chahal, AAG, Punjab. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU , J. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No.110 dated 15.10.2024, under Sections 221 and 132 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar. 2. Allegations are that petitioner along with co-accused in furtherance of their common intention caused grievous injuries on the person of injured-Jagjit Singh and obstructed him from discharging his official duty. 3. Contends that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 and in pursuance thereof, he has already joined investigation; hence, his custodial interrogation is not required. Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.08 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10438-2025 2 4. The above factual position is not disputed by learned State Counsel, on instructions from quarter concerned and submits that his custodial interrogation is not required. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. 6. It transpires that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 and the order reads as under:- “Contends, inter alia, that it is a “no injury case” and the coaccused has already been granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2025 passed in CRM-7413-2025. Notice of motion. Ms.Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State; seek time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. Posted for 24.03.2025. To be heard alongwith CRM-7413-2025. In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer; but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing.” 7. It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 8. In view of the above, there is no justification to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 24.02.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 9. It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation. 10. The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter. 11. It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.08 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-10438-2025 3 recalling of this order. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 07.04.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.08 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document