227 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA LAKHANPAL SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. (through video conferencing) Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.290 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 331(6) of the Bharat registered at Police Station Tripri (Tripuri) 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LAKHANPAL SINGH V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. (through video conferencing) Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.290 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 331(6) of the Bharat registered at Police Station Tripri (Tripuri), Patiala, District Patiala. On 17.03.2025, 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.290 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Tripri (Tripuri) Patiala, District Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the injury attributed to the petitioner does not correspond to the injuries recorded in the Medical Legal Report (Annexure P in registration of FIR (supra), which create IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14151-2025 Date of decision: 21.04.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.290 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Patiala, District Patiala. , following order was passed: Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short S’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.290 dated 10.11.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190, 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Tripri (Tripuri) Patiala, District Patiala. counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the injury attributed to the petitioner does not correspond to the injuries recorded in the Medical Legal Report (Annexure P-3). There is a delay of 03 days in registration of FIR (supra), which creates a serious dent MANISHA 2025.04.21 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-14151 14151-2025 2 on the case set up by the prosecution. Further, the injury attributed to the petitioner is not grievous in nature. Moreover, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 05 years and no notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41 Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’)] has been served upon the petitioner. Notice of motion. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Chahit Bansal, Advocate appears on behalf of the complainant and files Memorandum of Appearance in the Court today, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place of the case file. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that specific role and specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner. Adjourned to 21.04.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble 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 Punj 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 Cr.P.C.). on the case set up by the prosecution. Further, the injury attributed to the petitioner is not grievous in nature. Moreover, the maximum sentence provided for the offences, under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is ears and no notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’)] has been served upon the petitioner. Notice of motion. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is ourt, accepts notice on behalf of the State and Mr. Chahit Bansal, Advocate appears on behalf of the complainant and files Memorandum of Appearance in the Court today, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the iate place of the case file. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that specific role and specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner. Adjourned to 21.04.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI 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 reafter, 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 ith the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.). MANISHA 2025.04.21 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-14151 3. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated petitioner has joined the investigation interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned the order dated 17.03.2025 terms and conditions enumerated in Section Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 6. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court l trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. April 21, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 14151-2025 3 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 Co Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.” Learned State counsel, on instructions from submits that in compliance of order dated 17.03.2025 petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned 17.03.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shal terms and conditions enumerated in Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 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 on instructions from ASI Gurpreet Singh, 17.03.2025 passed by this Court, the and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, , is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the 482(2) BNSS, 2023 (Erstwhile The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an est it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.04.21 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment