CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 104 CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2026 Shehnaz @ Sehinaj @ Rani ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Dr. Rau P. S. Girwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No.92 dated 02.05.2026, registered under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 (Sections 117(2) and 110 BNS added later on) at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathinda. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement recorded by the complainant Hari Singh alleging therein that on 28.04.2026, at about 5:30 pm, while he was walking in the street, he noticed two persons standing on a motorcycle. One of them threw a stone at a stray dog. When the complainant questioned him as to why he was throwing stones at the dog, both the persons came towards him on the motorcycle, started MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) -2- abusing him and assaulted him, during which his turban came off. On hearing the commotion, his brother Gurpreet Singh intervened and rescued him. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that the motorcycle rider was Sagar Kumar while the other person was Karam Singh, who thereafter fled from the spot. It was further alleged that on 29.04.2026 at about 8:30 AM, while the complainant was present at his house along with his family members, Bittu Singh, Raja Singh (armed with a wooden stick/dang), their sister Shehnaz alias Rani (petitioner), Sagar Kumar, and 2-3 unknown persons, carrying baseball bats and other weapons, reached outside his house. They started arguing with the complainant, whereupon the petitioner allegedly exhorted the others by saying that the complainant should be taught a lesson for having scuffled with their men on the previous night. Thereafter, Bittu Singh caught hold of the complainant. Upon his raising an alarm, his brother Gurpreet Singh came outside to intervene. Raja Singh struck Gurpreet Singh with the wooden stick on the left side of his head above the ear, causing him to fall to the ground. Thereafter, all the assailants kicked Gurpreet Singh while he was lying on the ground and also assaulted the complainant. On hearing their cries, people from the neighbourhood gathered, whereupon the assailants fled from the spot. While leaving, Sagar Kumar threatened the complainant that although he had escaped that day, he would be taught a proper lesson later. 3. Injured Gurpreet Singh was first taken to Civil Hospital, Bathinda, where, considering the seriousness of the head injury, he was referred to AIIMS Hospital, Bathinda, where he remained under treatment and had not regained consciousness. The complainant attributed the occurrence to the previous night's altercation with Sagar Kumar and Karam Singh, alleging that MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) -3- they, along with Raja Singh, Bittu Singh, petitioner Shehnaz alias Rani and other unknown persons, had assaulted his brother. He prayer for taking legal action in the matter. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, vide order dated 08.06.2026. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicate in this case merely because she is related to the principal accused. She is a 44 years’ old lady having clean antecedents. In fact, an earlier quarrel had taken place between the parties over a trivial issue relating to a stray dog and a cross-version was also recorded vide DDR No.8 dated 29.04.2026 on the statement of co-accused Karam Singh. Even Harbans Kaur, who had intervened to pacify the dispute, suffered injuries at the hands of the complainant party and was medico-legally examined. It is further argued that no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner and her only role is that she allegedly raised a lalkara. The grievous injury relied upon by the prosecution has specifically been attributed to co-accused Raja Singh. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from her. No useful purpose would be served by detaining her into custody. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned State counsel, on the strength of the status report, has argued that the petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR and is not entitled to the extraordinary MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) -4- relief of anticipatory bail. The allegations disclose that the petitioner actively participated in the occurrence by raising a lalkara, thereby facilitating and encouraging the assault committed by the co-accused. The occurrence resulted in grievous injuries to the complainant party, leading to addition of serious penal provisions during investigation. The investigation is still in progress and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for conducting thorough investigation in the matter. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. This Court has heard the rival submissions. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have actively participated in the occurrence by accompanying the other accused persons and raising a lalkara, exhorting them to teach the complainant a lesson, immediately before the assault in which Gurpreet Singh sustained a serious head injury. Though the specific blow has been attributed to co-accused Raja Singh, however, the allegations prima facie indicate that the petitioner shared the common intention of the unlawful assembly and facilitated the commission of the offence. The investigation is still at a crucial stage and her custodial interrogation cannot be said to be unwarranted at this stage. In case her custodial interrogation is denied to the investigating agency, the same will leave many glaring loopholes and gaps adversely affecting the investigation. The powers under Section 482 of BNSS are extraordinary and the same are to be exercised sparingly in exceptional circumstances. The judicial discretion conferred upon the Court has to be properly exercised after application of mind as to the nature and gravity of the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34366-2026 (O&M) -5- accusation, possibility of applicant fleeing from justice and other factors to decide whether it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail as such grant to some extent interferes in the sphere of investigation of an offence. The Court has also to see that an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. The custodial interrogation of a suspected person is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 482 of BNSS. The Court must be circumspect while exercising such power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule and has to be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist to resort to that extra ordinary remedy. In the present case, no such exceptional circumstances warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory bail by this Court are existing. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 8. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 09.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document