CRM-M-21853-2025 -1- 108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21853-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.04.2025 Inderjeet Singh ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Ranbir Singh Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. ******* HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.6 dated 26.02.2025 under Sections 125, 126(2), 324(4), 191(3), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections 25/27/54/59 of Arms Act (Section 109 of BNS was added later on), registered at Police Station Arif Ke, District Ferozepur. VISHNU 2025.04.29 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-21853-2025 -2- 2. Brief facts of the case, as alleged, are that on 25.02.2025 at about 07.15 p.m., when the complainant along with his friends was coming towards his village in his car bearing registration No.PB-02L-0255, the petitioner and co-accused, armed with firearms, were present near Bela Singh Wala turn in two cars and they started firing upon car of the complainant, due to which, he hurtled away the car, however, the assailants followed his car upto Village Bhala Chak and while following them, they fired gunshots on his car. Hence, the FIR (supra). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case due to party faction in the village. The mother of the petitioner contested elections for the post of Sarpanch against wife of the complainant, who won the elections. Thereafter, mother of the petitioner filed an election petition. As such, the complainant has been nourishing a grudge against the petitioner and his family members. The complainant belongs to the ruling party and under his influence, entire family of the petitioner has been roped in. Further, it is a case of no injury and prima facie, offence under Section 109 of BNS was not made out. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is the main accused and he used the revolver and fired bullets on the complainant, while chasing his vehicle. The VISHNU 2025.04.29 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-21853-2025 -3- entire incident has been recorded in the video and one of the bullet hit the rear windshield of car of the complainant. As such, intention of the petitioner to kill the complainant is proved on record. The petitioner is involved in four more cases. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case with their able assistance, it transpires that the petitioner is involved in four more cases and for conducting the proper and fair investigation and to take the same to its logical end, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative. 6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the antecedents of the petitioner, without commenting anything further on merits of the case, lest it may prejudice the rights of either of the parties, this Court finds no ground to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to him. 7. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed. [ HARPREET SINGH BRAR ] 25.04.2025 JUDGE vishnu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VISHNU 2025.04.29 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh