CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 103 Gurjant Singh State of Punjab CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of bearing FIR No. under Sections Police Station arrest/anticipatory bail before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn on 31.07.2025 of anticipatory/pre 12.08.2025 -44419-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Gurjant Singh V/s State of Punjab CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Lajwant Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, AAG Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) The present petition is the second attempt under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bearing FIR No.45 dated 31.05.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1) & 118(2), 133, 3(5), 329(3) of BNS, 2023 Police Station Hathur, Ludhiana Rural, Punjab. The petitioner had earlier applied for grant of pre arrest/anticipatory bail before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn 31.07.2025. The relevant part of said order “After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition in hand. Ordered accordingly.” Thereafter, the present petition i.e. the second petition for grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail has been preferred by the petitioner on 12.08.2025. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44419-2025 Date of decision: 25.08.202 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Lajwant Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, AAG Punjab. The present petition is the second attempt under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case , registered for the offences punishable 118(1) & 118(2), 133, 3(5), 329(3) of BNS, 2023 Hathur, Ludhiana Rural, Punjab. The petitioner had earlier applied for grant of pre arrest/anticipatory bail before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn nt part of said order reads as under:- After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition in hand. Thereafter, the present petition i.e. the second petition for grant arrest bail has been preferred by the petitioner on .2025 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the bail to the petitioner in case , registered for the offences punishable 118(1) & 118(2), 133, 3(5), 329(3) of BNS, 2023 at The petitioner had earlier applied for grant of pre- arrest/anticipatory bail before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner Thereafter, the present petition i.e. the second petition for grant arrest bail has been preferred by the petitioner on AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 2. 29.05.2025, the complainant namely Baljot Sing Bahmania, alleged that fields of his maternal grandfather Acharwal. Gurjant Singh and Swaran Singh, all residents of Acharwal, were present near the common boundary line ( complainant and his grandfather noticed that the accused were ploughing the common boundary line ( decided by the Panchayat. objected, namely Chamkaur Singh with a to his leg Singh (petitioner herein) with a spade Singh and Gurcharan Singh assaulted grandfather namely Jora Singh attacked arm and hand. During the assault, t gold ring and wristwatch missing. When the complainant attempted to record the incident on his mobile phone, However, o Manpreet Singh reached the spot where tractor along with -44419-2025 The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that on 29.05.2025, the complainant namely Baljot Sing Bahmania, alleged that on 29.05.2025 at about 6:30 a.m., he visited the fields of his maternal grandfather namely Acharwal. At that time, accused namely Gurjant Singh (petitioner herein), Jora Singh, Gurcharan Singh @ Charna, and Swaran Singh, all residents of Acharwal, were present near the common boundary line (watt), with a tractor parked nearby. The complainant and his grandfather noticed that the accused were ploughing common boundary line (watt) which had earlier been demarcated and decided by the Panchayat. When the complainant and his grandfather objected, the accused Palwinder Singh @ Pinder attacked Chamkaur Singh with a daator (sickle) c to his leg on account of which he fell down (petitioner herein) struck the injured leg with a spade and caused further grievous injuries while Singh and Gurcharan Singh assaulted grandfather namely Chamkaur Singh with rods Jora Singh attacked the complainant with a sickle, inflicting injuries on his arm and hand. During the assault, the turbans of both victims were torn, and gold ring and wristwatch of the grandfather of the complainant missing. When the complainant attempted to record the incident on his mobile phone, the accused Palwinder Singh snatched and smashed the wever, on hearing their cries, the father of the complainant namely Manpreet Singh reached the spot wherein tractor along with their respective weapons. The injured were taken to Civil 2 The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that on 29.05.2025, the complainant namely Baljot Singh, aged 19 years, resident of on 29.05.2025 at about 6:30 a.m., he visited the namely Chamkaur Singh in village namely Palwinder Singh @ Pinder, , Jora Singh, Gurcharan Singh @ Charna, and Swaran Singh, all residents of Acharwal, were present near the ), with a tractor parked nearby. The complainant and his grandfather noticed that the accused were ploughing which had earlier been demarcated and the complainant and his grandfather Palwinder Singh @ Pinder attacked his grandfather (sickle) causing a severe cut injury down. Thereafter, accused Gurjant injured leg of his grandfather and hand further grievous injuries while accused Swaran Singh and Gurcharan Singh assaulted both the complainant and his Chamkaur Singh with rods. Furthermore, the accused with a sickle, inflicting injuries on his he turbans of both victims were torn, and of the grandfather of the complainant went missing. When the complainant attempted to record the incident on his Palwinder Singh snatched and smashed the same the father of the complainant namely inafter all the accused fled on their weapons. The injured were taken to Civil The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that on h, aged 19 years, resident of on 29.05.2025 at about 6:30 a.m., he visited the village Palwinder Singh @ Pinder, , Jora Singh, Gurcharan Singh @ Charna, and Swaran Singh, all residents of Acharwal, were present near their ), with a tractor parked nearby. The complainant and his grandfather noticed that the accused were ploughing which had earlier been demarcated and the complainant and his grandfather his grandfather ausing a severe cut injury Gurjant and hand Swaran both the complainant and his . Furthermore, the accused with a sickle, inflicting injuries on his he turbans of both victims were torn, and went missing. When the complainant attempted to record the incident on his same. the father of the complainant namely the accused fled on their weapons. The injured were taken to Civil AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Hospital Hathur admitted to DMC Ludhiana for treatment. that the motive common watt, which had been settled by the Panchayat but was disr by the accused, leading to this brutal attack. in question was registered and investigation ensued. 3. has been falsely implicated into the FIR in relationship with co petitioner recorded. Learned counsel has further iterated that the implication of the petitioner is purely mala fide, arising from an ongoing land dispute between the complainant party and co ancestral property, which has since been amicably resolve. According to learned counsel, the petitioner himsel jointly owned alongwith other family members and has no independent role in the alleged incident. more than a calculated attempt to harass and humiliate the petitioner. further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is willing to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating agency as and when directed. Learned counsel further asserts that the co accused of the petit the concession of by the learned counsel and hence bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of the -44419-2025 Hospital Hathur and then were referred to admitted to DMC Ludhiana for treatment. motive of the assault was the long common watt, which had been settled by the Panchayat but was disr by the accused, leading to this brutal attack. in question was registered and investigation ensued. Learned counsel for the petitioner iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in relationship with co-accused Gurcharan Singh, who is the cousin of the and on whose statement, a cross recorded. Learned counsel has further iterated that the implication of the petitioner is purely mala fide, arising from an ongoing land dispute between the complainant party and co-accused Gurcharan Singh in respect of ancestral property, which has since been amicably resolve. According to learned counsel, the petitioner himself is only a co jointly owned alongwith other family members and has no independent role in the alleged incident. Moreover, the present FIR appears to be nothing more than a calculated attempt to harass and humiliate the petitioner. further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is willing to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating agency as and when directed. Learned counsel further asserts that the co accused of the petitioner namely Gurcharan Singh has the concession of anticipatory bail by the Court below. by the learned counsel that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and hence no useful purpose would be served by bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of the 3 ed to civil Hospital, Jagraon and finally admitted to DMC Ludhiana for treatment. It was alleged by the complainant the assault was the long-standing dispute regarding the common watt, which had been settled by the Panchayat but was disregarded by the accused, leading to this brutal attack. On these set of allegations, FIR in question was registered and investigation ensued. Learned counsel for the petitioner iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question solely on account of his accused Gurcharan Singh, who is the cousin of the and on whose statement, a cross-version of the incident was duly recorded. Learned counsel has further iterated that the implication of the petitioner is purely mala fide, arising from an ongoing land dispute between accused Gurcharan Singh in respect of ancestral property, which has since been amicably resolve. According to f is only a co-sharer in the said land, jointly owned alongwith other family members and has no independent role Moreover, the present FIR appears to be nothing more than a calculated attempt to harass and humiliate the petitioner. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is willing to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating agency as and when directed. Learned counsel further asserts that the co Gurcharan Singh has already been granted the Court below. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of the Jagraon and finally It was alleged by the complainant standing dispute regarding the egarded On these set of allegations, FIR Learned counsel for the petitioner iterated that the petitioner question solely on account of his accused Gurcharan Singh, who is the cousin of the version of the incident was duly recorded. Learned counsel has further iterated that the implication of the petitioner is purely mala fide, arising from an ongoing land dispute between accused Gurcharan Singh in respect of ancestral property, which has since been amicably resolve. According to sharer in the said land, jointly owned alongwith other family members and has no independent role Moreover, the present FIR appears to be nothing It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner is willing to fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating agency as and when directed. Learned counsel further asserts that the co- already been granted It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation him behind the bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of the AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- instant petition is entreated for and the of the anticipatory 4. anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the implication is wholly misconceived and devoid of merit. the petitioner actively participated in the incident specific and categoric The role attributed to the petitioner in the assault stands corroborated by the medical evidence of the injured complainant and his grandfather. Furthermore, the registration of the cross absolve the petitioner of his liability. the extent of the injuries sustained and the necessity for custodial interrogation, the dismissal of the instant petition is prayed for. 5. gone through the available record of the case. 6. anticipatory bail by the petitioner. A second anticipatory bail petition is indeed maintainable under law; however, it requires demonstration of a substantial change in circumstances since the earlier pet proposition of law that such a change must be significant and not merely superficial or technical, to warrant reconsideration. This standard ensures that the remedy of successive bail petitions is not misused through repeated filings but is available when new and material factors arise that alter the initial assessment of the case. petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on i.e. second petition for grant of ant -44419-2025 instant petition is entreated for and the petitioner anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned State counsel anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the implication is wholly misconceived and devoid of merit. the petitioner actively participated in the incident specific and categorical allegations levelled against him by the complainant. The role attributed to the petitioner in the assault stands corroborated by the medical evidence of the injured complainant and his grandfather. Furthermore, the registration of the cross absolve the petitioner of his liability. Given the severity of the allegations, the extent of the injuries sustained and the necessity for custodial interrogation, the dismissal of the instant petition is prayed for. I have heard the learned counsel for the gone through the available record of the case. The present petition is a second petition for grant of anticipatory bail by the petitioner. A second anticipatory bail petition is indeed maintainable under law; however, it requires demonstration of a substantial change in circumstances since the earlier pet proposition of law that such a change must be significant and not merely superficial or technical, to warrant reconsideration. This standard ensures that the remedy of successive bail petitions is not misused through repeated gs but is available when new and material factors arise that alter the initial assessment of the case. The first anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on i.e. second petition for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed thereafter on 4 petitioner be granted the concession learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegation of false implication is wholly misconceived and devoid of merit. He submits that the petitioner actively participated in the incident as is evident from the al allegations levelled against him by the complainant. The role attributed to the petitioner in the assault stands corroborated by the medical evidence of the injured complainant and his grandfather. Furthermore, the registration of the cross-version DDR does not ipso facto Given the severity of the allegations, the extent of the injuries sustained and the necessity for custodial interrogation, the dismissal of the instant petition is prayed for. d the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. present petition is a second petition for grant of anticipatory bail by the petitioner. A second anticipatory bail petition is indeed maintainable under law; however, it requires demonstration of a substantial change in circumstances since the earlier petition. It is a settled proposition of law that such a change must be significant and not merely superficial or technical, to warrant reconsideration. This standard ensures that the remedy of successive bail petitions is not misused through repeated gs but is available when new and material factors arise that alter the The first anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 31.07.2025. The instant petition icipatory bail has been filed thereafter on concession rant of allegation of false He submits that as is evident from the al allegations levelled against him by the complainant. The role attributed to the petitioner in the assault stands corroborated by the medical evidence of the injured complainant and his grandfather. ipso facto Given the severity of the allegations, the extent of the injuries sustained and the necessity for custodial and have present petition is a second petition for grant of anticipatory bail by the petitioner. A second anticipatory bail petition is indeed maintainable under law; however, it requires demonstration of a ition. It is a settled proposition of law that such a change must be significant and not merely superficial or technical, to warrant reconsideration. This standard ensures that the remedy of successive bail petitions is not misused through repeated gs but is available when new and material factors arise that alter the The first anticipatory bail filed by the . The instant petition icipatory bail has been filed thereafter on AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 12.08.2025 forward which would indicate that the petitioner is entitled to maintain his second petition for grant of anticipatory bail. From the enti conspectus brought forward in the present petition, no fresh ground or circumstance is made out so as to enable the petitioner to file and maintain the second anticipatory bail petition. However, since the first anticipatory bail petition was di merits thereof, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the instant one on merits thereof as well. 7. serious allegations have been lev was lodged on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant with regard to an incident that allegedly occurred on 29.05.2025. The complainant while visiting his maternal grandfather at village Acharwal, were petitioner alongwith co boundary line ( with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant and his grandfather causing grievous injuries snat complainant. involving use of deadly weapons and infliction of serious injures upon the complainant party. The contention of false implication, being defence, cannot be delved into at this stage. The mere fact that a cross version DDR has been registered at the instance of the co dilute the specific role attributed to the petitioner in the alleged occurrence in question. -44419-2025 .08.2025. No fresh substantial change in circumstance has been brought forward which would indicate that the petitioner is entitled to maintain his second petition for grant of anticipatory bail. From the enti conspectus brought forward in the present petition, no fresh ground or circumstance is made out so as to enable the petitioner to file and maintain the second anticipatory bail petition. However, since the first anticipatory bail petition was dismissed as withdrawn and there was no adjudication on merits thereof, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the instant one on merits thereof as well. As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. was lodged on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant with regard to an incident that allegedly occurred on 29.05.2025. The complainant while visiting his maternal grandfather at village Acharwal, were petitioner alongwith co-accused over a dispute regarding the common boundary line (watt) between their agricultural fields. The accused, armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant and his grandfather causing grievous injuries snatched and smashed the mobile phone of the complainant. The allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature, involving use of deadly weapons and infliction of serious injures upon the complainant party. The contention of false implication, being defence, cannot be delved into at this stage. The mere fact that a cross version DDR has been registered at the instance of the co dilute the specific role attributed to the petitioner in the alleged occurrence in question. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, 5 No fresh substantial change in circumstance has been brought forward which would indicate that the petitioner is entitled to maintain his second petition for grant of anticipatory bail. From the entire factual conspectus brought forward in the present petition, no fresh ground or circumstance is made out so as to enable the petitioner to file and maintain the second anticipatory bail petition. However, since the first anticipatory smissed as withdrawn and there was no adjudication on merits thereof, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the instant one on As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, elled against the petitioner. The FIR ibid was lodged on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant with regard to an incident that allegedly occurred on 29.05.2025. The complainant while visiting his maternal grandfather at village Acharwal, were attacked by the accused over a dispute regarding the common between their agricultural fields. The accused, armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant and his grandfather causing ched and smashed the mobile phone of the The allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature, involving use of deadly weapons and infliction of serious injures upon the complainant party. The contention of false implication, being a matter of defence, cannot be delved into at this stage. The mere fact that a cross version DDR has been registered at the instance of the co-accused does not dilute the specific role attributed to the petitioner in the alleged occurrence plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, No fresh substantial change in circumstance has been brought forward which would indicate that the petitioner is entitled to maintain his re factual conspectus brought forward in the present petition, no fresh ground or circumstance is made out so as to enable the petitioner to file and maintain the second anticipatory bail petition. However, since the first anticipatory smissed as withdrawn and there was no adjudication on merits thereof, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the instant one on As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, ibid was lodged on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant with regard to an incident that allegedly occurred on 29.05.2025. The complainant while attacked by the accused over a dispute regarding the common between their agricultural fields. The accused, armed with deadly weapons, assaulted the complainant and his grandfather causing ched and smashed the mobile phone of the The allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature, involving use of deadly weapons and infliction of serious injures upon the a matter of defence, cannot be delved into at this stage. The mere fact that a cross- accused does not dilute the specific role attributed to the petitioner in the alleged occurrence plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. The medical record purportedly seems to be corroborating the prosecution/complainant version goes without saying that in the instant case, the complainant has categorically stated that the petitioner along with co an unlawful assembly, acted in furtherance of their common object multiple inju 8. grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the Societ & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that medical records substantiate the nature and extent of the by the complainant record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. 1039], the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) -44419-2025 from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. The medical record purportedly seems to be corroborating the prosecution/complainant version goes without saying that in the instant case, the complainant has categorically stated that the petitioner along with co an unlawful assembly, acted in furtherance of their common object multiple injuries upon the complainant party. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the Society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. medical records substantiate the nature and extent of the by the complainant and his grandfather. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail etitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced with a favourable order under 6 from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. The medical record purportedly seems to be corroborating the prosecution/complainant version of causing injuries. goes without saying that in the instant case, the complainant has categorically stated that the petitioner along with co-accused and as part of an unlawful assembly, acted in furtherance of their common object inflicted ries upon the complainant party. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that y can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to case is not made out against the petitioner. The medical records substantiate the nature and extent of the injuries sustained . The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail etitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. The medical record purportedly seems to be It goes without saying that in the instant case, the complainant has accused and as part of inflicted It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that y can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to The injuries sustained . The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail etitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is of the Code. In a AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory ba milieu of the case in hand. Moreover, allegations, the nature of injuries caused, the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. 10. of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. 11. August 25 Ajay -44419-2025 case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught wi subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory ba of the case in hand. Moreover, in view of the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of injuries caused, the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. tion is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. August 25, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 7 case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the cted person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual in view of the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of injuries caused, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. tion is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the pre- arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the th the danger of the person being degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the il in the factual in view of the seriousness of the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the truth. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.26 11:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document