216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13067-2025 Date of decision: 07.04.2025 Sukhmandeep Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Harvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.94 dated 05.11.2024 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 118(1)/115(2)/191(3)/190 of BNS (Sections 109/118(2) of BNS added later on vide Rapat No.14 dated 14.11.2024) registered at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran. On 10.03.2025, the following order was passed:- ‘ Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.94 dated 05.11.2024 under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 191(3), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) (Sections 109 & 118(2) of BNS were added later on vide rapat No.14 dated 14.11.2024), registered at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that there is a delay of 04 days in registration of FIR (supra). It is a case of version and cross-version and the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature and the same is on non-vital part of the body. It is further contended that similarly situated two co-accused of the petitioner, namely Jasbir Singh @ Jasbeer Singh and Gurbir Singh, have already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide separate orders of even date i.e. 07.02.2025 passed in CRM-M-6143-2025 and CRM-M-30-2025, respectively. Notice of motion for 07.04.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Neha 2025.04.07 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13067-2025 -2- Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.’ Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Savinderpal Singh, at the very outset informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 10.03.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). The petition stands disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 07.04.2025 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Neha 2025.04.07 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document