IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HAR 138 RESHAM SINGH ALIAS BHAGU STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. Present: Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. K.S. Sidhu Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab. Mr. A.S. Khinda, Advocate for respondent No.2. KIRTI SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. Apprehending a Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.154 dated 07.09.2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 333, 351(2), 74 and 3(5) of BNS, (Section 117(2) of BNS added later on), register Sadar, District Jalandhar Rural. 2. Vide order dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HAR AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-71591 Date of Decision: 20.05.2026 RESHAM SINGH ALIAS BHAGU VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab. Mr. A.S. Khinda, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** , J. (ORAL) Apprehending arrest the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.154 dated 07.09.2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 333, 351(2), 74 and 3(5) of BNS, (Section 117(2) of BNS added later on), register Sadar, District Jalandhar Rural. Vide order dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter: “xxxx 2. This Court had passed the following order while issuing notice of motion on 22.12.2025: “xxxx Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR on the statement of the complainant, who is married to the petitioner’s real brother. It is submitted that the complainant and her family members are IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 71591-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.05.2026 … PETITIONER ....RESPONDENTS KIRTI SINGH Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for , Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab. Mr. A.S. Khinda, Advocate for respondent No.2. rrest the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.154 dated 07.09.2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 333, 351(2), 74 and 3(5) of BNS, (Section 117(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Nakodar Vide order dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter:- This Court had passed the following order while notice of motion on 22.12.2025: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR on the statement of the complainant, who is married to the petitioner’s real brother. It is t the complainant and her family members are rrest the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.154 dated 07.09.2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 333, 351(2), 74 and 3(5) of BNS, ed at Police Station Nakodar Vide order dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner was directed to join This Court had passed the following order while Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR on the statement of the complainant, who is married to the petitioner’s real brother. It is SWARNJIT SINGH 2026.05.21 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71591-2025 (O&M) -2- keeping grudge against the petitioner and his family members for the reason that the petitioner had filed a civil suit against the complainant and her husband, which stands decreed vide judgment dated 06.02.2024, and also because the petitioner and his family members did not extend any support to the complainant when she contested the Panchayati elections. With respect to the alleged occurrence, learned counsel submits that in fact, the complainant party was the aggressor party, and that the petitioner party had acted in self defence. Moreover, the son and daughter of the petitioner also suffered injuries, which is evident from Annexures P-4 and P-6. It is further submitted that there is an unexplained delay of one day in the registration of the instant FIR. Moreover, the co-accused has been extended the concession of anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 03.11.2025. Notice of motion. At the asking of the Court, Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and prays for time to file response. Adjourned to 23.01.2026. In the meantime, no coercive steps be taken qua the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating his submissions, as recorded hereinabove, submits that there is no material on record to substantiate the sweeping allegations levelled against the 60 year old petitioner, who is willing to join investigation and cooperate. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the present petition and submit that the FIR discloses specific and serious allegations against the petitioner, that he gave a datar blow upon the head of the complainant with an intention to kill her. 5. Prima facie, it is borne from the case record that the present case is that of version and cross-version. The allegations levelled in the FIR, and the role sought to be attributed to the petitioner, are all disputed questions of fact, veracity of which shall be determined in due course. 6. Adjourned to 20.05.2026. 7. In the meantime, the petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023;- (1) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so. (2) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts to the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer. (3)That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court. 8. Needless to mention that the investigating agency/officer shall continue with the investigation of the case in usual manner.” SWARNJIT SINGH 2026.05.21 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-71591-2025 (O&M) -3- 3. Learned State counsel on instructions from the investigating officer concerned, submits that in compliance of order dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for any further investigation. 4. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. Order dated 28.04.2026 passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the condition enumerated under Section 482(2) BNSS. 5. This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read as granting the petitioner(s) indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 6. Liberty is reserved with the investigating agency/complainant to move to this Court for a direction under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.), in the event of violation of any term, stipulated under Section 482(2) BNSS, or upon showing any other sufficient cause. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (KIRTI SINGH) 20.05.2026 JUDGE SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SWARNJIT SINGH 2026.05.21 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document