IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 224 JATINDER SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha the petitioner in case FIR No. of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station 2. this Court to the contents of the FIR, annexed as Annexure P was alleged that two young men came to the house of the complainant at 10:55 p.m. on the fateful d the house; no person sustained any firearm injuries. However, without any cogent evidence on record, merely on the basis of suspicion, the complainant alleged in the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM- Date of decision: JATINDER SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr. B.S. Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab. with ASI Sohan Singh. Mr. Hakam Singh, Advocate with Mr. Jasdeep Grewal, Advocate for the complainant. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of the petitioner in case FIR No.26 dated 21.03.2025 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25/27 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Kathunangal, District Learned counsel for the petitioner this Court to the contents of the FIR, annexed as Annexure P was alleged that two young men came to the house of the complainant at 10:55 p.m. on the fateful day and indulged in indiscriminate firing towards ; no person sustained any firearm injuries. However, without any cogent evidence on record, merely on the basis of suspicion, the complainant alleged in the FIR that he suspected the involvement of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -M-21299-2025 Date of decision: July 10, 2025 .....Petitioner .....Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL DAG, Punjab. Mr. Hakam Singh, Advocate with The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of for grant of anticipatory bail to 21.03.2025 under Sections 125, 3(5) and Section 25/27 of Arms Act, 1959, , District Amritsar (Annexure P-1). rned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the contents of the FIR, annexed as Annexure P-1, wherein it was alleged that two young men came to the house of the complainant at ay and indulged in indiscriminate firing towards ; no person sustained any firearm injuries. However, without any cogent evidence on record, merely on the basis of suspicion, the complainant FIR that he suspected the involvement of the petitioner in view Petitioner .....Respondent of bail to 125, 3(5) , n the attention of 1, wherein it was alleged that two young men came to the house of the complainant at ay and indulged in indiscriminate firing towards ; no person sustained any firearm injuries. However, without any cogent evidence on record, merely on the basis of suspicion, the complainant the petitioner in view Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21299 of a history of strained relations between them; a couple of weeks prior to the occurrence in question, allegedly the petitioner had threatened and therefore, as per the complainant, the petitioner could be involved in the said occurrence. 3. CCTV footage retrieved from the p one of those two persons, who allegedly fired towards the house of the complainant. It has, therefore, been submitted that it is evident that without any basis and that too on account of the animosity between the false and fabricated case has been planted upon the petitioner. 4. learned counsel for the complainant, have vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. I learned counsel in the CCTV footage, however, at the very first instance, the complainant had raised a suspicion question. The suspicion cannot at this also a matter of record that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel for the complainant was telephonically threatened to withdraw fr consequences and in fact, the family of the counsel complainant was attacked, No.0090 dated 07.07.2025. 21299-2025 of a history of strained relations between them; a couple of weeks prior to occurrence in question, allegedly the petitioner had threatened and therefore, as per the complainant, the petitioner could be involved in the said Learned counsel has asserted that however, even as per the CCTV footage retrieved from the place of occurrence, the petitioner was not one of those two persons, who allegedly fired towards the house of the complainant. It has, therefore, been submitted that it is evident that without any basis and that too on account of the animosity between the false and fabricated case has been planted upon the petitioner. On being put to notice, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, have vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. I learned counsel for the complainant that although the petitioner is not visible in the CCTV footage, however, at the very first instance, the complainant had raised a suspicion qua the involvement of the petitioner in the crime question. The suspicion cannot at this stage be said to be unfounded as it is also a matter of record that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel for the complainant was telephonically threatened to withdraw from the case or else she would also have to face dire equences and in fact, the family of the counsel complainant was attacked, leading to the registration of another No.0090 dated 07.07.2025. -2- of a history of strained relations between them; a couple of weeks prior to occurrence in question, allegedly the petitioner had threatened and therefore, as per the complainant, the petitioner could be involved in the said Learned counsel has asserted that however, even as per the lace of occurrence, the petitioner was not one of those two persons, who allegedly fired towards the house of the complainant. It has, therefore, been submitted that it is evident that without any basis and that too on account of the animosity between the parties, a false and fabricated case has been planted upon the petitioner. On being put to notice, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, have vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. It has been contended by the that although the petitioner is not visible in the CCTV footage, however, at the very first instance, the complainant the involvement of the petitioner in the crime in stage be said to be unfounded as it is also a matter of record that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel for the complainant was telephonically case or else she would also have to face dire equences and in fact, the family of the counsel representing the leading to the registration of another FIR of a history of strained relations between them; a couple of weeks prior to occurrence in question, allegedly the petitioner had threatened and therefore, as per the complainant, the petitioner could be involved in the said Learned counsel has asserted that however, even as per the lace of occurrence, the petitioner was not one of those two persons, who allegedly fired towards the house of the complainant. It has, therefore, been submitted that it is evident that without parties, a On being put to notice, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, have vehemently opposed the prayer t has been contended by the that although the petitioner is not visible in the CCTV footage, however, at the very first instance, the complainant in stage be said to be unfounded as it is also a matter of record that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel for the complainant was telephonically case or else she would also have to face dire the FIR Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21299 5. record including the contents of the FIR and the CCTV does not deem it fit to extend the bail to the petitioner. 6. firing at the residence of the complainant occurred on the night Although no physical injuries were sustained by any person, the act – targeted gunfire directed at a residential house about the seriousness and audacity of the crime. The incident clearly demonstrates an intent 7. petitioner is that the petitioner does not figure in the CCTV footage retrieved from the place of occurrence. However, the mere absence of the petitioner in the CCTV footage cannot be regarded as or a ground to hold that considering his pet 8. instance i.e. while registering the FIR itself, specifically expressed a suspicion regarding the involv incident, where the petitioner had allegedly threatened him. and the immediacy of this suspicion cannot be entirely disregarded speculated, particularly in view of the past history of animosity parties. 21299-2025 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record including the contents of the FIR and the CCTV does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary petitioner. It is not in dispute that an incident involving indiscriminate firing at the residence of the complainant occurred on the night Although no physical injuries were sustained by any person, targeted gunfire directed at a residential house about the seriousness and audacity of the crime. The incident clearly demonstrates an intent to terrorize and intimidate. The prime argument advanced by the learned counsel for the is that the petitioner does not figure in the CCTV footage retrieved from the place of occurrence. However, the mere absence of the petitioner in the CCTV footage cannot be regarded as conclusive proof of his innocence or a ground to hold that his involvement is improbable, especially while considering his petition for anticipatory bail. It is pertinent to note that the complainant, at the very first instance i.e. while registering the FIR itself, specifically expressed a suspicion regarding the involvement of the petitioner, citing a previous incident, where the petitioner had allegedly threatened him. and the immediacy of this suspicion cannot be entirely disregarded speculated, particularly in view of the past history of animosity -3- Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record including the contents of the FIR and the CCTV footage, this Court extraordinary concession of anticipatory It is not in dispute that an incident involving indiscriminate firing at the residence of the complainant occurred on the night in question. Although no physical injuries were sustained by any person, the nature of targeted gunfire directed at a residential house – speaks volumes about the seriousness and audacity of the crime. The incident clearly to terrorize and intimidate. The prime argument advanced by the learned counsel for the is that the petitioner does not figure in the CCTV footage retrieved from the place of occurrence. However, the mere absence of the petitioner in conclusive proof of his innocence ent is improbable, especially while ition for anticipatory bail. It is pertinent to note that the complainant, at the very first instance i.e. while registering the FIR itself, specifically expressed a of the petitioner, citing a previous incident, where the petitioner had allegedly threatened him. The consistency and the immediacy of this suspicion cannot be entirely disregarded as speculated, particularly in view of the past history of animosity between the Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the footage, this Court anticipatory It is not in dispute that an incident involving indiscriminate in question. the nature of speaks volumes about the seriousness and audacity of the crime. The incident clearly The prime argument advanced by the learned counsel for the is that the petitioner does not figure in the CCTV footage retrieved from the place of occurrence. However, the mere absence of the petitioner in conclusive proof of his innocence ent is improbable, especially while It is pertinent to note that the complainant, at the very first instance i.e. while registering the FIR itself, specifically expressed a of the petitioner, citing a previous The consistency as between the Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21299 9. this Court. It has been brought on record, and remains uncontroverted, after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel of the complainant received threatening phone calls from unk persons warning her to withdraw from the case. intimidation. It is 07.07.2025 that the family members of the counsel for the complainant subjected to an attack. facie suggest a concerted attempt to intimidate those associated with the prosecution. complicity of the petitioner, whether directly or through his cannot be discounted at this stage. 10. isolation. They are buttressed by subsequent acts of intimidation and violence, which lend credence to the apprehension expressed by the complainant and his counsel. 11. act of firing, intimidation are yet to be fully unearthed. may impead the effective collection of evidence and embolden others to adopt similar tactics of harassment and intimidation. 21299-2025 Further, the chain of subsequent events is of grave concern to this Court. It has been brought on record, and remains uncontroverted, after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel of the complainant received threatening phone calls from unk persons warning her to withdraw from the case. intimidation. It is alleged, and now formally recorded in FIR No.90 dated 07.07.2025 that the family members of the counsel for the complainant subjected to an attack. These developments, viewed cumulatively, suggest a concerted attempt to obstruct the due process of law and those associated with the prosecution. complicity of the petitioner, whether directly or through his cannot be discounted at this stage. The allegations in the FIR in question, therefore, do not stand in isolation. They are buttressed by subsequent acts of intimidation and which lend credence to the apprehension expressed by the complainant and his counsel. The identity and role of the co- act of firing, and the possible larger conspiracy behind the acts of intimidation are yet to be fully unearthed. Premature release of the petitioner may impead the effective collection of evidence and embolden others to adopt similar tactics of harassment and intimidation. -4- sequent events is of grave concern to this Court. It has been brought on record, and remains uncontroverted, that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the counsel of the complainant received threatening phone calls from unknown persons warning her to withdraw from the case. This was not a solitary act of alleged, and now formally recorded in FIR No.90 dated 07.07.2025 that the family members of the counsel for the complainant were These developments, viewed cumulatively, prima obstruct the due process of law and those associated with the prosecution. The possibility of the complicity of the petitioner, whether directly or through his associates, The allegations in the FIR in question, therefore, do not stand in isolation. They are buttressed by subsequent acts of intimidation and which lend credence to the apprehension expressed by the -accused, the motive behind the and the possible larger conspiracy behind the acts of post-FIR Premature release of the petitioner may impead the effective collection of evidence and embolden others to adopt similar tactics of harassment and intimidation. sequent events is of grave concern to that after the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case, the nown This was not a solitary act of alleged, and now formally recorded in FIR No.90 dated were prima obstruct the due process of law and The possibility of the associates, The allegations in the FIR in question, therefore, do not stand in isolation. They are buttressed by subsequent acts of intimidation and which lend credence to the apprehension expressed by the accused, the motive behind the FIR Premature release of the petitioner may impead the effective collection of evidence and embolden others to Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21299 12. antecedents and the conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 13. 14. shall not be construed to be an expression of op case. July 10, 2025 Jaspreet Kaur 21299-2025 In view of the gravity and the nature of the allegations, the antecedents and the conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of op , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -5- In view of the gravity and the nature of the allegations, the antecedents and the conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. ly, the instant petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No In view of the gravity and the nature of the allegations, the antecedents and the conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove inion on the merits of the Jaspreet Kaur 2025.07.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh