CRM-M-23205-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 212 CRM-M-23205-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 28.05.2025 MANBIR SINGH ....Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present : Mr. Inder Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, DAG Punjab. ***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR (Annexure P-1) as under: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 06 15.01.2025 333, 125, 324(4), 351(3), 191(3), 190 BNS; 25 and 27 of the Arms Act Khilchian, District Amritsar 2. It is inter alia contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He contends that neither any specific overt act or injury has been attributed to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.31 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-23205-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the status report submitted by State opposed the petition by alleging that specific attribution to petitioner is there of having fired at the house of the complainant after trespassing therein along with co-accused by forming an unlawful assembly. He submits that the recovery of the weapon is yet to be effected, for which the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the bail petition. 4. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it is observed that the instant FIR was registered on 15.01.2025 on the statement of the complainant to the effect that while he was present in his house along with his family members, he heard the sound of lalkaras and pelting stones outside his house and noticed Harpreet Kaur, Jasreet Kaur, Manbir Singh (petitioner herein), Mahavir Singh, Jagjit Singh were present there along with 2-3 unidentified persons. The petitioner was armed with pistol, while Jagjit Singh was armed with rifle and Mahavir Singh was armed with baseball bat. Thereafter, co-accused Harpreet Kaur and Jasreet Kaur raised lalkara and all the assailants trespassed into the house of the complainant. The complainant has specifically stated that the petitioner along with co-accused Jagjit Singh had fired at their house with their respective weapons and caused damage to the window-panes. When the father of the complainant fired in self defence, all the assailants ran away from the spot. 5. From the perusal of record, it is observed that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having fired at the time of occurrence SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.31 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-23205-2025 (O&M) -3- after trespassing into the house of the complainant. The petitioner is having criminal antecedents, as similar cases are also registered against him. The recovery of weapon is yet to be effected from the petitioner, for which his custodial interrogation is required. 6. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of offence, it is observed that no case is made out in favour of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail, as a consequence, the petition is hereby dismissed. 7. Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 28.05.2025 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.31 16:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment