CRM-M-25158 242 RAJ SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: Present: ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. 20 1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. As per paragraph 9 of the bail application and as per the sta State, the accused has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: dated 05.04.2025, time was about 10:00 AM, that I and my father Maghar Singh were going towards Jaggi Flour Mill from our home on our motorcycle Deluxe No. PB 2928 that on the circular road, Khuh Wala Chowk, my nephew Tejwinder Singh and my cousin (son of my Taya) Nirmal Singh were standing. When we reached near the puncture repair shop of Sarwan Singh on our motorcycle then one Scorpio vehicle, of white colour, No. HR driven by Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. On the front seat of the vehicle Raju Singh Sarpanch was sitting. They intercepted our motorcycle with their vehicle. Raju Singh Sarpanch down from the vehicle and from the rear doors Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, who was holding GANDASA in one hand and revolver in the other hand and Rachhpal Singh son of 25158-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. Dated Police Station 06.04.2025 Jaukian, District Mansa The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], ing anticipatory bail. As per paragraph 9 of the bail application and as per the sta the accused has no criminal antecedents. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “ Stated that I am resident of aforesaid address. I am an agriculturist. On dated 05.04.2025, time was about 10:00 AM, that I and my father Maghar Singh were going towards Jaggi Flour Mill from our home on our motorcycle Deluxe No. PB the circular road, Khuh Wala Chowk, my nephew Tejwinder Singh and my cousin (son of my Taya) Nirmal Singh were standing. When we reached near the puncture repair shop of Sarwan Singh on our motorcycle then one Scorpio vehicle, of white colour, No. HR-22-P-9987 came from the opposite direction which was being driven by Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. On the front seat of the vehicle Raju Singh Sarpanch was sitting. They intercepted our motorcycle with their vehicle. Raju Singh Sarpanch son of Jag Singh was holding double barrel rifle. He came down from the vehicle and from the rear doors Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, who was holding GANDASA in one hand and revolver in the other hand and Rachhpal Singh son of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25158-2025 Date of decision: 03.07.2025 ...Petitioner …Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA L.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, D.A.G., Punjab. Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate for the complainant. Sections Jaukian, District 126(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 324(4) of BNS, 2023 and 25 of Arms Act (117(4) BNS added later on) The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], As per paragraph 9 of the bail application and as per the status report filed by the The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which Stated that I am resident of aforesaid address. I am an agriculturist. On dated 05.04.2025, time was about 10:00 AM, that I and my father Maghar Singh were going towards Jaggi Flour Mill from our home on our motorcycle Deluxe No. PB-31-N- the circular road, Khuh Wala Chowk, my nephew Tejwinder Singh and my cousin (son of my Taya) Nirmal Singh were standing. When we reached near the puncture repair shop of Sarwan Singh on our motorcycle then one Scorpio vehicle, of 9987 came from the opposite direction which was being driven by Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. On the front seat of the vehicle Raju Singh Sarpanch was sitting. They intercepted our motorcycle with their son of Jag Singh was holding double barrel rifle. He came down from the vehicle and from the rear doors Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, who was holding GANDASA in one hand and revolver in the other hand and Rachhpal Singh son of The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], tus report filed by the The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which Stated that I am resident of aforesaid address. I am an agriculturist. On dated 05.04.2025, time was about 10:00 AM, that I and my father Maghar Singh were - the circular road, Khuh Wala Chowk, my nephew Tejwinder Singh and my cousin (son of my Taya) Nirmal Singh were standing. When we reached near the puncture repair shop of Sarwan Singh on our motorcycle then one Scorpio vehicle, of 9987 came from the opposite direction which was being driven by Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. On the front seat of the vehicle Raju Singh Sarpanch was sitting. They intercepted our motorcycle with their son of Jag Singh was holding double barrel rifle. He came down from the vehicle and from the rear doors Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, who was holding GANDASA in one hand and revolver in the other hand and Rachhpal Singh son of Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25158 Gurmeet Singh, who was hold Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu son of Bogha Singh, who was holding iron pipe fitted with flywheel and Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was empty handed, came out of the vehicl PANCHAYAT elections they have helped Nirmal Singh, so they should be taught a lesson. In the meantime Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of rifle held by him in my stomach. I and my father, along with m blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards me. I stepped back and the blow fell on the fallen motorcycle. With this blow my motorcycle No. PB 31N 2928 suffered huge loss. Thereafter Kulvir Singh gav Maghar Singh. My father extended his left hand to save himself. The blow hit on his left hand thumb. In the meantime, when I tried to get up then Rachhpal Singh gave blow of SOTI, held in his hand, tow down. While I was lying down Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu gave blow of iron pipe fitted with flywheel, held in his hand, on my right arm. Thereafter Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of his rifle of Makha, also came down from the vehicle. He gave fist and kick blows to me and my father. Thereafter Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was standing nearby, gave RAULA of "Maar Ditta Maar Ditta". On hearing our RAULA Nimral Singh son of Babu Singh and Tejwinder Singh son of Ajaib Singh, resident of Raipur, came on the spot. In the meantime all these respective weapons. Thereafter Nirmal my father Maghar Singh admitted at Civil Hospital, Mansa for treatment. There Doctor Sahib gave treatment Bathinda for treatment, where I am under treatment. Legal action may kindly be taken against Raju Singh Sarpanch son of Jag Singh, Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, Rachhpal Singh son of Gurmee Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, residents of Raipur and Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. The motive is that during the PANCHAYAT elections we had helped Nirmal Singh son connivance with each other and have inflicted injuries after intercepting us. I have got recorded my statement, the same has bee 4. Counsel for the petitioner on instru deposited in the gun house and he undertakes that he will not claim it back during the pendency of the trial without the permiss imposing any stringent conditions an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which as follows: “THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER (A) basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, role and participation of the petitioner in the occurrence was duly established, 25158-2025 2 Gurmeet Singh, who was holding SOTI in his one hand and pistol in the other hand and Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu son of Bogha Singh, who was holding iron pipe fitted with flywheel and Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was empty handed, came out of the vehicle. Raju Singh Sarpanch PANCHAYAT elections they have helped Nirmal Singh, so they should be taught a lesson. In the meantime Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of rifle held by him in my stomach. I and my father, along with motorcycle, fell down. In the meantime Kulvir Singh gave a blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards me. I stepped back and the blow fell on the fallen motorcycle. With this blow my motorcycle No. PB 31N 2928 suffered huge loss. Thereafter Kulvir Singh gave blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards my father Maghar Singh. My father extended his left hand to save himself. The blow hit on his left hand thumb. In the meantime, when I tried to get up then Rachhpal Singh gave blow of SOTI, held in his hand, towards me. The blow landed on the back of my head. Then I fell down. While I was lying down Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu gave blow of iron pipe fitted with flywheel, held in his hand, on my right arm. Thereafter Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of his rifle on my nose. Thereafter Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha, also came down from the vehicle. He gave fist and kick blows to me and my father. Thereafter Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was standing nearby, gave fist and kick blow to me and my father. I and my father raised the RAULA of "Maar Ditta Maar Ditta". On hearing our RAULA Nimral Singh son of Babu Singh and Tejwinder Singh son of Ajaib Singh, resident of Raipur, came on the spot. In the meantime all these persons fled away from the spot, in respective weapons. Thereafter Nirmal Singh arranged for the vehicle and got me and Maghar Singh admitted at Civil Hospital, Mansa for treatment. There Doctor Sahib gave treatment to us. Due to severe injuries I was referred to AIIMS Hospital, Bathinda for treatment, where I am under treatment. Legal action may kindly be taken against Raju Singh Sarpanch son of Jag Singh, Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, Rachhpal Singh son of Gurmeet Singh, Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu Singh son of Bogha Singh, Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, residents of Raipur and Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. The motive is that during the PANCHAYAT elections we had helped Nirmal Singh son of Babu Singh. Because of this reason they have acted in connivance with each other and have inflicted injuries after intercepting us. I have got recorded my statement, the same has been read out to me and is correct. Counsel for the petitioner on instructions, submits that gun and licence are already deposited in the gun house and he undertakes that he will not claim it back during the pendency of the trial without the permission of the trial Court. He imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which “THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, role and participation of the petitioner in the occurrence was duly established, ing SOTI in his one hand and pistol in the other hand and Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu son of Bogha Singh, who was holding iron pipe fitted with flywheel and Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was empty Singh Sarpanch raised LALKARA that during the PANCHAYAT elections they have helped Nirmal Singh, so they should be taught a lesson. In the meantime Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of rifle held by him in my stomach. otorcycle, fell down. In the meantime Kulvir Singh gave a blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards me. I stepped back and the blow fell on the fallen motorcycle. With this blow my motorcycle No. PB 31N 2928 suffered huge loss. e blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards my father Maghar Singh. My father extended his left hand to save himself. The blow hit on his left hand thumb. In the meantime, when I tried to get up then Rachhpal Singh gave blow of ards me. The blow landed on the back of my head. Then I fell down. While I was lying down Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu gave blow of iron pipe fitted with flywheel, held in his hand, on my right arm. Thereafter Raju Singh Sarpanch gave on my nose. Thereafter Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha, also came down from the vehicle. He gave fist and kick blows to me and my father. Thereafter Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was fist and kick blow to me and my father. I and my father raised the RAULA of "Maar Ditta Maar Ditta". On hearing our RAULA Nimral Singh son of Babu Singh and Tejwinder Singh son of Ajaib Singh, resident of Raipur, came on the spot. In persons fled away from the spot, in their vehicle alongwith their Singh arranged for the vehicle and got me and Maghar Singh admitted at Civil Hospital, Mansa for treatment. There Doctor to us. Due to severe injuries I was referred to AIIMS Hospital, Bathinda for treatment, where I am under treatment. Legal action may kindly be taken against Raju Singh Sarpanch son of Jag Singh, Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, Rachhpal t Singh, Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu Singh son of Bogha Singh, Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, residents of Raipur and Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. The motive is that during the PANCHAYAT elections we had of Babu Singh. Because of this reason they have acted in connivance with each other and have inflicted injuries after intercepting us. I have got read out to me and is correct.” ctions, submits that gun and licence are already deposited in the gun house and he undertakes that he will not claim it back during the the trial Court. He prays for bail by contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read “THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, role and participation of the petitioner in the occurrence was duly established, as such, petitioner was rightly ing SOTI in his one hand and pistol in the other hand and Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu son of Bogha Singh, who was holding iron pipe fitted with flywheel and Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was empty raised LALKARA that during the PANCHAYAT elections they have helped Nirmal Singh, so they should be taught a lesson. In the meantime Raju Singh Sarpanch gave butt blow of rifle held by him in my stomach. otorcycle, fell down. In the meantime Kulvir Singh gave a blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards me. I stepped back and the blow fell on the fallen motorcycle. With this blow my motorcycle No. PB 31N 2928 suffered huge loss. e blow of GANDASA, held in his hand, towards my father Maghar Singh. My father extended his left hand to save himself. The blow hit on his left hand thumb. In the meantime, when I tried to get up then Rachhpal Singh gave blow of ards me. The blow landed on the back of my head. Then I fell down. While I was lying down Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu gave blow of iron pipe fitted with flywheel, held in his hand, on my right arm. Thereafter Raju Singh Sarpanch gave on my nose. Thereafter Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha, also came down from the vehicle. He gave fist and kick blows to me and my father. Thereafter Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Raipur, who was fist and kick blow to me and my father. I and my father raised the RAULA of "Maar Ditta Maar Ditta". On hearing our RAULA Nimral Singh son of Babu Singh and Tejwinder Singh son of Ajaib Singh, resident of Raipur, came on the spot. In hicle alongwith their Singh arranged for the vehicle and got me and Maghar Singh admitted at Civil Hospital, Mansa for treatment. There Doctor to us. Due to severe injuries I was referred to AIIMS Hospital, Bathinda for treatment, where I am under treatment. Legal action may kindly be taken against Raju Singh Sarpanch son of Jag Singh, Kulvir Singh son of Raju Singh, Rachhpal t Singh, Gurwinder Singh alias Babbu Singh son of Bogha Singh, Jasvir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, residents of Raipur and Ravneet Singh son of Baltej Singh, resident of Makha. The motive is that during the PANCHAYAT elections we had of Babu Singh. Because of this reason they have acted in connivance with each other and have inflicted injuries after intercepting us. I have got ctions, submits that gun and licence are already deposited in the gun house and he undertakes that he will not claim it back during the prays for bail by trial incarceration would cause read From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, role and participation of the as such, petitioner was rightly Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25158 named as accused in the present case/FIR. THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER. (A) basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, it was well established on record that earlier during the Panchayat elections, injured party had supported the opposite party of the petitioner i.e. Nirmal Singh, as such, in order to fulfill the grudge, Petitioner along with his companions had attacked the complainant party and inflicted be grievous in nature. As such, present case/FIR was rightly registered against the accused persons including the petitioner. In order to complete the investigation proceedings, custodial case, petitioner is granted with the concession of regular bail there are chances of absconding of the petitioner from the trial of the case, winning over the witnesses of prosecution and tampering does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail or any other alternative relief from this Hon'ble Court. REASONING: 7. Given the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner, role, no ground for denial of bail is made out. 8. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre trial incarceration. 9. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegatio case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre incarceration at this stage. 10. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. CONDITIONS: 11. Given above, petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then 25158-2025 3 named as accused in the present case/FIR. THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER. From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, it was well established on record that earlier during the Panchayat elections, injured party had supported the opposite party of the petitioner i.e. Nirmal Singh, as such, in order to fulfill the grudge, Petitioner along with his companions had attacked the complainant party and inflicted several injuries, out of which some of the injuries were declared to be grievous in nature. As such, present case/FIR was rightly registered against the accused persons including the petitioner. In order to complete the investigation proceedings, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to the IO. In case, petitioner is granted with the concession of regular bail there are chances of absconding of the petitioner from the trial of the case, winning over the witnesses of prosecution and tampering with the prosecution evidence. As such, petitioner does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail or any other alternative relief from this Hon'ble Court.” REASONING:- Given the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner, role, no ground for ial of bail is made out. trial incarceration should not be a replica of post evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre trial incarceration. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations, role attributed case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre incarceration at this stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. CONDITIONS: Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, it was well established on record that earlier during the Panchayat elections, injured party had supported the opposite party of the petitioner i.e. Nirmal Singh, as such, in order to fulfill the grudge, Petitioner along with his companions had attacked the complainant party several injuries, out of which some of the injuries were declared to be grievous in nature. As such, present case/FIR was rightly registered against the accused persons including the petitioner. In order to complete the investigation interrogation of the petitioner is required to the IO. In case, petitioner is granted with the concession of regular bail there are chances of absconding of the petitioner from the trial of the case, winning over the witnesses with the prosecution evidence. As such, petitioner does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail or any other alternative relief from Given the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner, role, no ground for trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre- Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the From the statement of injured/complainant Gursewak Singh and on the basis of video footage clip of the occurrence, it was well established on record that earlier during the Panchayat elections, injured party had supported the opposite party of the petitioner i.e. Nirmal Singh, as such, in order to fulfill the grudge, Petitioner along with his companions had attacked the complainant party several injuries, out of which some of the injuries were declared to be grievous in nature. As such, present case/FIR was rightly registered against the accused persons including the petitioner. In order to complete the investigation interrogation of the petitioner is required to the IO. In case, petitioner is granted with the concession of regular bail there are chances of absconding of the petitioner from the trial of the case, winning over the witnesses with the prosecution evidence. As such, petitioner does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail or any other alternative relief from Given the nature of the injury attributed to the petitioner, role, no ground for conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but is analyzing it for the stage of - Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie and the other factors peculiar to this trial Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds the Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25158 concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 12. While fu personal identification details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E- 13. This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. 14. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by t of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third inhuman treatment, etc. 15. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim until the statements of all non This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigat Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. 16. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitating th primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This 25158-2025 4 concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: AADHAR number Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. Mobile number (If available) -Mail id (If available) This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third inhuman treatment, etc. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim until the statements of all non-official and informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to Vikram Singh v Central Bureau of Investigation, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitating th primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. rnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim d informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to ion, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Bhatt v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021:INSC:192, 2021 SCC Online SC 230. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied rnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During ndecent language, Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall not enter the property, workplace, and residence of the victim d informal witnesses in the trial are recorded. This Court is imposing this condition to rule out any attempt by the accused to incapacitate, influence, or cause any discomfort to the victim. Reference be made to ion, 2018 All SCR (Crl.) 458); and Aparna Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount e accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25158 restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the p firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days and inform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain th offense. 17. The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:73 decided on July 20, 2022, A Three “The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed.” 18. In case the Investigator/Officer arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections m then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, Investigator/Officer days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 19. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State an victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court 20. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the 21. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the 25158-2025 5 restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days and inform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and reclaim them in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of liberties must be eschewed.” In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections m then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State an victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of the evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the etitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days and inform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subject to shall be entitled to renew and reclaim them in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; e accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT 5 [Para 28], Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the the evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the etitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days and inform the Investigator of the compliance. However, subject to shall be entitled to renew and reclaim them in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; e accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT 5 [Para 28], Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section entioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding in that case, the Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven d/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25158 case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 22. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 23. Petition allowed stand disposed of. 03.07.2025 Jyoti-IV 25158-2025 6 case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any cate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any cate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any cate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants may in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, Jyoti 2025.07.08 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document