CRM-M-11431 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Kamal Kishore Saini State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: - NAMIT KUMAR, J. 1. 08.02.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 74, 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar, petitioner has approached this Court under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre 2. Axxxx, her husband Rajesh Gupta and brother Bansal went to Down Town Hotel, Ajauli turn, dinner and when they came out from the hotel and tried their vehicle at about 10:50 p.m. persons present near the vehicle bearing registration 11431 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11431 Reserved on Pronounced on: Kamal Kishore Saini Versus Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Mr. H.S. Multani, Advocate, and Ms. Harpriya Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Saurabh Sabharwal, Advocate, for the complainant. KUMAR, J. Apprehending his arrest in case FIR No.16 dated 08.02.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 74, 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar, petitioner has approached this Court under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre According to the prosecution, on 07.02.2025 , her husband Rajesh Gupta and brother Bansal went to Down Town Hotel, Ajauli turn, dinner and when they came out from the hotel and tried their vehicle at about 10:50 p.m., petitioner- persons present near the vehicle bearing registration 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 11431 of 2025 Reserved on : 27.03.2025 Pronounced on: 01.04.2025 ......Petitioner ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR H.S. Multani, Advocate, and Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Saurabh Sabharwal, Advocate, Apprehending his arrest in case FIR No.16 dated 08.02.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 74, 126(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar, petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail. , on 07.02.2025, complainant , her husband Rajesh Gupta and brother-in-law (jeth) Mukesh Bansal went to Down Town Hotel, Ajauli turn, Naya Nangal for taking dinner and when they came out from the hotel and tried to approach -Kamal Saini along with 2/3 persons present near the vehicle bearing registration No.HP-80-A-2784 RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 of grey colour encircl their vehicle and started beating them without Petitioner-Kamal Saini gave fist blow on the pushed him due to which he fell on the ground. unknown companions gave kick blows on the person when he was lying on the ground and when complainant her husband, and pulled her. He threw her on the ground and crushed her h his shoes forcibly. When her brother the above named assailants gave beating to her Jeth Mukesh Bansal. When the unknown persons were beating her husband and she tried to rescue him, jacket. The bottle blow which petitioner tried to hit the himself by raising her husband, from her thigh, due person. Number of along with his giving threat to petitioner-Kamal Saini and his their factory and they got Station Bathu, District Una. 11431 of 2025 of grey colour encircled them at once when their vehicle and started beating them without Kamal Saini gave fist blow on the pushed him due to which he fell on the ground. n companions gave kick blows on the person when he was lying on the ground and when complainant her husband, petitioner-Kamal Saini caught hold and pulled her. He threw her on the ground and crushed her h shoes forcibly. When her brother-in-law (Jeth) tried to rescue her, above named assailants gave beating to her Jeth Mukesh Bansal. the unknown persons were beating her husband and she tried to him, petitioner caught hold her fr buttons of her jacket were broken. on the head of her husband but the bottle did not break, on petitioner after breaking the bottle by hitting it on the ground tried to hit the same on the person of her husband. Her husband saved himself by raising his arms. When the complainant again tried to rescue her husband, petitioner pulled her on the road after caught holding her from her thigh, due to which she has received number of in person. Number of persons gathered there and along with his companions decamped from the place of occurrence by giving threat to kill them. The cause of dispute was that earlier Kamal Saini and his persons gave beating to the workers of their factory and they got registered FIR against them in the police Station Bathu, District Una. 2 ed them at once when they were going towards their vehicle and started beating them without disclosing anything. Kamal Saini gave fist blow on the face of her husband and pushed him due to which he fell on the ground. Kamal Saini and his n companions gave kick blows on the person of her husband when he was lying on the ground and when complainant tried to rescue Kamal Saini caught hold of her from her hair and pulled her. He threw her on the ground and crushed her hand with law (Jeth) tried to rescue her, above named assailants gave beating to her Jeth Mukesh Bansal. the unknown persons were beating her husband and she tried to caught hold her from her chest and torn her buttons of her jacket were broken. Petitioner gave a glass on the head of her husband but the bottle did not break, on after breaking the bottle by hitting it on the ground same on the person of her husband. Her husband saved his arms. When the complainant again tried to rescue pulled her on the road after caught holding her to which she has received number of injuries on her persons gathered there and petitioner-Kamal Saini companions decamped from the place of occurrence by kill them. The cause of dispute was that earlier gave beating to the workers of registered FIR against them in the police RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 3. petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to political rivalry as he being member of the Zila Parishad, Tehsil Haroli, District Una helped the workers of the factory of the complainant to whom the complainant has not paid salary for the last few months. He further the alleged offence. He further the offence punishable under Section 74 of the BNS, 2023 are bailable. Learned counsel is made out agai with an intention to outrage the modesty of submitted that no specific injury has been attributed to him. He further submitted investigation. 4. counsel for the complainant, arrest bail to the petitioner gave beatings to the (Jeth). He submitted that for proper investigation of the case and to recover the weapon of offence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. pen drives wherein video recording of the incident was made which are taken on record. Registry to keep the same at an appropriate place with the file. 11431 of 2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present due to political rivalry as he being member of the Zila Parishad, Tehsil Haroli, District Una helped the workers of the factory of the complainant to whom the complainant has not paid salary for the last few months. He further submitted that the pet the alleged offence. He further submitted the offence punishable under Section 74 of the BNS, 2023 are bailable. Learned counsel submitted that no offence under Section 74 of the BNS is made out against the petitioner as he has not committed any offence with an intention to outrage the modesty of that no specific injury has been attributed to him. He further that the petitioner is ready and willing to investigation. Per contra, learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has opposed the prayer arrest bail to the petitioner as the petitioner along with his co gave beatings to the complainant, her husband and brother (Jeth). He submitted that for proper investigation of the case and to recover the weapon of offence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Learned counsel for the complainant has produced two pen drives wherein video recording of the incident was made which are taken on record. Registry to keep the same at an appropriate place with 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present due to political rivalry as he being member of the Zila Parishad, Tehsil Haroli, District Una helped the workers of the factory of the complainant to whom the complainant has not paid salary for the last that the petitioner has not committed that all the offences except the offence punishable under Section 74 of the BNS, 2023 are bailable. that no offence under Section 74 of the BNS nst the petitioner as he has not committed any offence with an intention to outrage the modesty of the complainant. He further that no specific injury has been attributed to him. He further that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the learned State counsel, assisted by learned has opposed the prayer for grant of pre- petitioner along with his co-accused complainant, her husband and brother-in-law (Jeth). He submitted that for proper investigation of the case and to recover the weapon of offence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner Learned counsel for the complainant has produced two pen drives wherein video recording of the incident was made which are taken on record. Registry to keep the same at an appropriate place with RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 5. the record and seen the relevant video rec 6. co-accused brother-in-law (Jeth) and gave them beatings blows upon the face of the husband of the complain Gupta and thereafter pushed him and along with his co the complainant was lying on the road. As per status report State, when the complainant came forward to save her husband, petitioner dragged her from her hair and made her to lay on the road. While the complainant was lying on the road, petitioner rubbed his shoe on her palm and when her brother forward to save them, petitioner and his co beatings to him. When again, the complainant tried to save her husband, petitioner caught hold of her from her jacket and broke its buttons. Petitioner also attacked t complainant with a glass bottle. complainant on the road by grabbing her from her thigh and as a result of which she received the spot, petitioner and hi car while giving threats to them. 7. person in the said occurrence which are as under: 11431 of 2025 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused and seen the relevant video recording Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with 2 wrongfully restrained the complainant, her husband and law (Jeth) and gave them beatings blows upon the face of the husband of the complain Gupta and thereafter pushed him and he fell on the road. Petitioner along with his co-accused gave kick and fist blows while husband of the complainant was lying on the road. As per status report , when the complainant came forward to save her husband, petitioner dragged her from her hair and made her to lay on the road. While the complainant was lying on the road, petitioner rubbed his shoe on her palm and when her brother-in forward to save them, petitioner and his co beatings to him. When again, the complainant tried to save her husband, petitioner caught hold of her from her jacket and broke its buttons. Petitioner also attacked t complainant with a glass bottle. Further, the petitioner dragged the complainant on the road by grabbing her from her thigh and as a result of which she received multiple injuries. When the people gathered on the spot, petitioner and his co-accused fled away from the spot in their car while giving threats to them. As per MLR, complainant received six injuries on person in the said occurrence which are as under: “1. 3 Reddish Abrasions measuring between 0.5 x 0.5 cm to 2 cm x 1 cm over Right Hand and dorsal 4 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused ording. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with 2-3 restrained the complainant, her husband and law (Jeth) and gave them beatings. Petitioner gave fist blows upon the face of the husband of the complainant, namely Rajesh fell on the road. Petitioner and fist blows while husband of the complainant was lying on the road. As per status report filed by the , when the complainant came forward to save her husband, petitioner dragged her from her hair and made her to lay on the road. While the complainant was lying on the road, petitioner rubbed his in-law Mukesh Bansal came forward to save them, petitioner and his co-accused gave severe beatings to him. When again, the complainant tried to save her husband, petitioner caught hold of her from her breast and torn her jacket and broke its buttons. Petitioner also attacked the husband of the Further, the petitioner dragged the complainant on the road by grabbing her from her thigh and as a result injuries. When the people gathered on accused fled away from the spot in their complainant received six injuries on her person in the said occurrence which are as under: dish Abrasions measuring between 0.5 x 0.5 cm over Right Hand and dorsal RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 8. of Mukesh Bansal shows that he has received four injuries on his person which are as under: 11431 of 2025 surface of middle, ring and little complaint of pain in right hand. Tenderness present. Advised Ortho opinion. 2. Reddish Abrasion measuring 1.5 x 1.5 cm over Left Knee on anterior surface with complaint of pain left knee. Advised Ortho 3. Reddish bruise measuring 2 cm x 2cm over Right Knee on Anterior surface with complaint of pain in right knee, advised Ortho opinion. 4. Complaint of pain in right inner thigh and left inner thigh. No external ortho opinion. 5. Complaint of pain in neck on right side posteriorly. No external injury seen. Advised Ortho opinion. 6. Complaint of pain in left arm and left forearm. N external injury seen. Advised ortho opinion. Perusal of copy of MLR regarding injuries on the person Mukesh Bansal shows that he has received four injuries on his which are as under: “1. Reddish bruise measuring 1 cm x 1 cm over Right Cheek 2 cm inferior to right eye with complaint of swelling around right orbit 2. Linear reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm on Distal Phalanx of middle finger of right hand on dorsal surface with complaint of pain Advised ortho opinion. 3. Reddish Circular Abrasion measuring 1 cm over right elbow on dorsal surface with complaint of pain in right elbow. A 4. Complaint of pain in right side of chest. No external injury seen. Advised surgery opinion. 5 surface of middle, ring and little finger with complaint of pain in right hand. Tenderness Advised Ortho opinion. Reddish Abrasion measuring 1.5 x 1.5 cm over Left anterior surface with complaint of pain in left knee. Advised Ortho Opinion. measuring 2 cm x 2cm over Right Anterior surface with complaint of pain in Ortho opinion. Complaint of pain in right inner thigh and left external injuries seen, advised Complaint of pain in neck on right side posteriorly. injury seen. Advised Ortho opinion. Complaint of pain in left arm and left forearm. No injury seen. Advised ortho opinion.” of copy of MLR regarding injuries on the person Mukesh Bansal shows that he has received four injuries on his measuring 1 cm x 1 cm over Right inferior to right eye with complaint of d right orbit. Advised Eye opinion. Linear reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm on Distal middle finger of right hand on dorsal surface with complaint of pain in right hand. Reddish Circular Abrasion measuring 1 cm x 1 cm elbow on dorsal surface with complaint . Advised ortho opinion. Complaint of pain in right side of chest. No dvised surgery opinion.” RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 9. of Rajesh Gupta shows that he has received five injuries on his person which are as under: 10. caused with blunt weapon finger, accordingly injury No.1 of the complainant was found grievous in nature. 11. along with his co husband and brother complainant by tearing her jacket and by catching ho complainant by her 11431 of 2025 Perusal of copy of MLR regarding injuries on the Rajesh Gupta shows that he has received five injuries on his person are as under: “1. Linear Reddish abrasion measuring 0.5 cm in length over left eyebrows lateral margin. 2. Linear reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm in length over left cheek 2.5 cm inferolateral to left eye with complaint of swelling around eye opinion. 3. 4 Reddish Circular Abrasions over left knee measuring between 0.1 cm x 0.1 cm to 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm with complaint of pain in left ortho opinion. 4. Reddish abrasion measuring 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm over right knee with complaint of pain in right knee Advised ortho opinion. 5. Reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm x 0.5 cm over right elbow on dorsal surface with complaint of pain in right elbow. Advised As per medical opinion, all the injuries were found to be caused with blunt weapon and there was fracture on the right little finger, accordingly injury No.1 of the complainant was found grievous There are specific allegations against the petitioner that he along with his co-accused gave severe beatings to the complainant, her husband and brother-in-law (Jeth) and tried to outrage the modesty of complainant by tearing her jacket and by catching ho complainant by her breast. 6 Perusal of copy of MLR regarding injuries on the person Rajesh Gupta shows that he has received five injuries on his person Linear Reddish abrasion measuring 0.5 cm in eyebrows lateral margin. Linear reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm in length 2.5 cm inferolateral to left eye with complaint of swelling around left orbit. Advised 4 Reddish Circular Abrasions over left knee 0.1 cm x 0.1 cm to 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm with complaint of pain in left knee. Advised Reddish abrasion measuring 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm over with complaint of pain in right knee. Reddish abrasion measuring 1 cm x 0.5 cm over on dorsal surface with complaint of dvised ortho opinion.” all the injuries were found to be and there was fracture on the right little finger, accordingly injury No.1 of the complainant was found grievous ic allegations against the petitioner that he beatings to the complainant, her law (Jeth) and tried to outrage the modesty of complainant by tearing her jacket and by catching hold of the RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 12. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court Cases 171, power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Sur extraordinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his/her liberty. 13. workers of the factory of the complainant who have not been paid salary for last few months. However, act of the petitioner in beating the husband and brother the complainant is condemnable as being people’s representative, he should not have taken individuals standing. Such an act is a condoned. Vigilante justice cannot replace due process, and legal action must follow established procedures. within the framework of law, like punishment. 14. in nature. information leading to discovery of material facts. Curtailing of freedom is necessary in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and to protect witnesses at this stage 11431 of 2025 As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court , power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) extraordinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of is not likely to otherwise misuse his/her liberty. As per own version of the petitioner, he helped the workers of the factory of the complainant who have not been paid salary for last few months. However, act of the petitioner in beating the d and brother-in-law of the complainant and tearing of clothes of the complainant is condemnable as being people’s representative, he should not have taken the law into his individuals to such humiliation by tarnishing standing. Such an act is an act of serious concern and cannot be condoned. Vigilante justice cannot replace due process, and legal action must follow established procedures. within the framework of law, not through public humiliation and mob like punishment. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. Curtailing of freedom is necessary in order to enable the investigation to proceed ndrance and to protect witnesses at this stage 7 As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court , power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (now Section aksha Sanhita, 2023) is somewhat extraordinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of is not likely to otherwise misuse his/her liberty. As per own version of the petitioner, he helped the workers of the factory of the complainant who have not been paid salary for last few months. However, act of the petitioner in beating the law of the complainant and tearing of clothes of the complainant is condemnable as being people’s representative, he own hands and subjecting by tarnishing their dignity and social serious concern and cannot be condoned. Vigilante justice cannot replace due process, and legal action must follow established procedures. Justice must be pursued not through public humiliation and mob- The allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. Curtailing of his freedom is necessary in order to enable the investigation to proceed ndrance and to protect witnesses at this stage. RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11431 of 2025 15. dictum passed in another, 2021(4) RCR (Crl.) 598 Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and another, (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 364 Apex Court had denied th the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. 16. 17. the considered view that petitioner cannot been falsely enroped in the crime and necessary in the case and that petitioner liberty. Moreover, weapon of said offence concession 18. 19. a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 01.04.2025 R.S. 11431 of 2025 Reliance can be placed upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court dictum passed in Prem Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and another, 2021(4) RCR (Crl.) 598 and Anil Kumar Singh v. High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and another, (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 364 Apex Court had denied the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. No other point has been argued. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that petitioner cannot been falsely enroped in the crime and his necessary in the case and that petitioner may . Moreover, weapon(s) used by the petitioner in the commission of said offence is yet to be recovered. Therefore, of anticipatory bail. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed. However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 8 Reliance can be placed upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court Prem Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Anil Kumar Singh v. High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and another, (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 364 whereby the Hon’ble e concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. No other point has been argued. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that petitioner cannot prima facie be said to have his custodial interrogation is may abscond and misuse his used by the petitioner in the commission herefore, he does not deserve In view of the above, the petition is dismissed. However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2025.04.01 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document