CRM-M-23550- IN THE H (205+101) SUKHDEEP SIN STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. S MANISHA BATR CRM-22237-2026 1. Appli exceptions and th placed on record a CRM-M-23550- 1. The 482 of Bharatiya N of anticipatory bai under Sections 10 and Section 27 of -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH P SINGH MANN Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Arshpreet Khadial, Advocate for Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) 2026 Application for placing on record i and the document annexed with the cord as Annexure P4. -2026 The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ry bail in case arising out of FIR No. ons 109, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya San 7 of the Arms Act at Police Station P JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-23550-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondents ANISHA BATRA te for the petitioner cord is allowed subject to all just th the application is ordered to be filed by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant R No.16 dated 01.02.2026 registered ya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) ation Phool, District Bathinda. M) 2026 oner s just o be ction grant tered NS”) AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23550- 2. The a recorded by the co he was going on h the way, the peti opposite direction petitioner took ou same with that ki Singh made an exh pushing them and the gate of the sam spot. The grudge complainant but d effected and the co registration of FI underway. On the brother of the pre case. Apprehendi anticipatory bail, Sessions Judge, Ba 3. It is a falsely implicated it was the complai case. The compla revolver with an -2026 (O&M) 2 The aforementioned FIR was registe the complainant Gurdhir Singh, allegi g on his motorbike to supply milk at e petitioner and his maternal uncle ection, while riding a bike and hit h ok out a kirpan from the motorbike a that kirpan with an intent to kill him an exhortation to not to spare the com m and to save his life, entered into hou the same while raising clamour. Bot grudge was that as on 16.01.2026, th t but due to intervention of other per the complainant was nursing a grudg of FIR, investigation proceedings On the same day on the basis of state he present petitioner, a GD No.33 wa ehending his arrest, the petitioner mov , which has been dismissed by th ge, Bathinda, vide order dated 13.03.2 It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. It is a case of vers mplainant and members of his party, omplainant Gurdhir Singh had fired a th an intent to kill him and the b registered on the basis of statement , alleging therein that on 01.02.2026, at Phool dairy. When he was on uncle Jagtar Singh came from the hit his motorbike. Thereafter, the bike and opened an assault upon the ill him, whereas the accused Jagtar e complainant. The complainant by nto house of Ranjit Singh and closed . Both of them fled away from the 26, the petitioner had assaulted the er persons a compromise had been grudge against the petitioner. After dings have been initiated and are f statement recorded by Labh Singh .33 was registered by way of cross- er moved an application for grant of by the Court of Learned Additional 3.03.2026. l for the petitioner that he has been f version and cross-version. In fact, party, who was the aggressors in this ired a shot at him with his licensed the bullet had penetrated into his ment 026, as on the , the n the agtar nt by losed the d the been After are ingh - nt of ional been fact, this nsed his AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23550- abdomen. He was not even found fi statement of his No.33. The injury ready to join the i recovery is to b complainant Gurd Court showing tha therefore, argued t 4. Per c the gravity of the deserve to be exte petition is liable to 5. This C for the parties at co 6. The p Singh, who is the cross-case lodged allegations, the pe Gurdhir Singh-com legal report of Gu 6X2 cm on front only and has been -2026 (O&M) 3 e was admitted in Bathinda Neurolog und fit to make statement after the o f his brother was recorded while r injury sustained by the complainant n the investigation. His custodial inte o be effected from him. The t Gurdhir Singh as filed in the cross- ing that it was he who was the aggress gued that the petition deserves to be al Per contra, learned State counsel has of the allegations as levelled agains e extended benefit of pre-arrest bail. able to be dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have op is the complainant of this case and lodged by the member of the peti the petitioner had struck blow with complainant thereby causing injur of Gurdhir Singh, he had sustained front of his neck. This injury has be s been opined to be grievous in natur urology and Trauma Centre and was the occurrence and that is why the hile registration of cross-case GD ainant was not a serious one. He is ial interrogation is not required. No The anticipatory bail petition of -case had been dismissed by this ggressor and not the petitioner. It is, o be allowed. sel has argued that keeping in view against the petitioner, he does not t bail. It is, therefore, urged that the ubmissions made by learned counsel ve opened an assault upon Gurdhir e and nominated as accused in the e petitioner’s party. As per the ith a kirpan on the person of the injury to him. As per the medico- ained one incised wound measuring has been attributed to the petitioner nature and dangerous to life as per was y the GD e is . No of this It is, view not e unsel rdhir the the f the - uring ioner s per AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23550- the medical opini showing that he to side of abdomen. due to sustaining f no blackening, tatt of evidence as to w has been attribute Allegations agains is well settled that circumstances onl would certainly no interrogation of th leave many glar investigation. The does not operate a trial Court. It is w arrest bail are to circumstances and of the accusation instant case, no s made out from t conducting thorou petitioner is must -2026 (O&M) 4 opinion. The petitioner has also pl t he too had sustained lacerated woun en. As per his claim, this wound wa ining firearm injury. However, since ng, tattooing was seen on these wound as to whether this injury was a firearm tributed to the petitioner has been op against him are serious in nature. The ed that anticipatory bail to an accused es only as a person couched in compa inly not disclose all the facts within hi n of the petitioner is denied to the In glaring loopholes and gaps, ther n. The Court is also required to see tha erate as inroad in the normal legal proc It is well settled proposition of law th re to be exercised by the Court in e es and with great caution while taking sation and the sentence which the c , no such exceptional or extra-ordina from the pleas as taken by the pe thorough and proper investigation c must. Taking into consideration th also placed on record Annexure P4 wound on the frond as well as back nd was in fact an entry and exit one, since as per the medico-legal report wounds, therefore, it is only a matter irearm injury or not? The injury that een opined to be dangerous to life. e. The case is at its nascent stage. It cused can be granted in exceptional comparative safety of pre-arrest bail thin his knowledge. In case custodial the Investigating Agency, that shall , thereby adversely effecting the see that an order of anticipatory bail al procedure of criminal cases by the law that the powers for grant of pre- rt in extra-ordinary and exceptional taking into consideration the nature the conviction may entail. In the ordinary circumstance is, however, the petitioner. For the purpose of ation custodial interrogation of the ion the above discussed facts, this e P4 back one, eport atter that life. t ional t bail odial shall the bail y the - ional ature the ever, e of f the this AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23550- Court is of the co Accordingly the sa 9. It is the purpose of dec on the merits of th 10. Since any, is rendered in 19.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 5 the considered opinion that the petit the same is dismissed. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been dism ed infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No e petition deserves to be dismissed. vation made hereinabove is only for and the same shall have no bearing dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No ssed. y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.20 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.