207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16230-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.05.2025 HARPREET SINGH ALIAS BITTU …Petitioner V/S STATE OF PUNJAB …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Shvetanshu Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG Punjab. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in DDR No.27 dated 20.09.2024 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(3)/194(2)/190/191(3) read with Section 109 BNS registered at Police Station Daba, Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) in case bearing FIR No.67 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 103/115(2)/191(3)/190/194(2)/351(3) of BNS (earlier Sections 302/323/148/149/160/506 of IPC) registered at Police Station Daba District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-3). 2. On 25.03.2025, following order was passed: “The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in DDR No.27 dated 20.09.2024 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/351(3)/194(2)/190/191(3) read with Section 109 BNS registered at Police Station Daba, Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) in case bearing FIR No.67 dated 18.09.2024 under Sections 103/115(2)/191(3)/190/194(2)/351(3) of BNS (earlier Sections 302/323/148/149/160/506 of IPC) registered at Police Station Daba District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-3). AJAY GOSWAMI 2025.05.23 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16230-2025 (O&M) -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the cross version recorded vide DDR No.27 dated 20.09.2024. The alleged incident had occurred on 17.09.2024, however, after a delay of three days, the cross case had been registered and during the alleged incident, one person from the side of the petitioner, namely, Daljeet Singh @ Kaka, had been murdered by the complainant party in the cross case. Further, the medical report of the complainant-Ishmit Singh reveals that he suffered one injury on the head and this injury as per the case set up by the prosecution is specifically attributed to co-accused, namely, Surinder Kaur. Further, the similarly situated co-accused, namely, Surinder Kaur, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.01.2025 passed in CRM-M-2694-2025 titled as ‘Surinder Kaur Versus State of Punjab.’ Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl.A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. In the meantime, keeping in view the 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 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, at the first instance, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and on his doing so or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear before the Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Investigating/Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Adjourned to 24.04.2025. AJAY GOSWAMI 2025.05.23 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16230-2025 (O&M) -2- Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court.” 3. Learned State counsel on instructions from Inspector Gurdial Singh, submits that in compliance of order dated 25.03.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation on 06.05.2025 and is not required for further custodial interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel the order dated 25.03.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions enumerated in Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) 22.05.2025 JUDGE Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2025.05.23 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document