206-2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-30978-2025 Date of decision: 11.07.2025 Vipan alias Vipin Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.77 dated 06.04.2025 under Sections 109/126(2)/115(2)/3(5) of BNS registered at Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka (Annexure P-1). On 29.05.2025, the 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 case bearing FIR No.77 dated 06.04.2025 under Sections 109/126(2)/115(2)/3(5) of BNS registered at Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that it is a case of version and cross-version. The offence under Section 109 of BNS has been deleted during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioner has received grievous injuries at the hands of complainant party. In fact, the complainant side is the aggressor party and the entire incident has been kept in the CCTV footage. Further, the petitioner is attributed simple injury and similarly situated co-accused, namely, Ram Dev @ Ram Dave, has been granted the concession of ad interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 passed in CRM-M-29918-2025 titled as ‘Ram Dev @ Ram Dave Vs. State of Punjab’ (Annexure P-6). 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. Neha 2025.07.11 19:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30978-2025 -2- 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; Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352, 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 11.07.2025. To be heard along with CRM-M-29918-2025. 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. ’ Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Nirmal Singh, at the very outset informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 29.05.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). The petition stands disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 11.07.2025 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Neha 2025.07.11 19:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document