CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) -:1:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (101+205) CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:10.07.2026 SAHIL … Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Sandeep Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana. -.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) CRM-25802-2026 1. The applicant-petitioner respectfully seeks the indulgence of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (analogous to Section 482 of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) for the incorporation and addition of Section 110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 308 of the old Indian Penal Code, 1860) into the headnote and prayer clause of the main petition. 2. In view of the sufficient grounds and reasons specified therein, the application is allowed, and Section 110 of the BNS (erstwhile Section 308 of the IPC) stands duly incorporated into the main petition. Consequently, the Registry is directed to carry out the necessary GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) -:2:- amendments and do the needful with ‘Red Ink’ in the headnote of the petition, subject to all just exceptions. Main Petition 3. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No.206 dated 15.04.2026, registered under Sections 115, 117(2), 126, 190, 191(3), 351(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 323, 325, 339, 149, 148, 120-B and 506 IPC), at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal (Annexure P-1). 4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 14.04.2026 at about 9:30 a.m., the complainant's son, Sawan, along with his friend Surjeet, was travelling on a motorcycle from Village Gangatehri towards Assandh. Upon reaching Highway 152D, Assandh, they were allegedly intercepted by 10–12 unidentified assailants travelling in a black Scorpio vehicle with its registration number concealed. It is alleged that the assailants, armed with lathis and dandas, assaulted Sawan and Surjeet, causing grievous injuries to Sawan, including a head injury, fracture of his arm, and injuries to his leg, as a result of which he became unconscious. The assailants allegedly continued the assault even thereafter and also caused injuries to Surjeet. Both injured were shifted to Gora Hospital, Assandh, by passers- by. It is further alleged that, while fleeing the spot, the assailants threatened to kill Sawan. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) -:3:- 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Anoop, which is legally inadmissible and carries no substantive evidentiary value. It is submitted that, apart from an alleged transfer of 7,000/- by the co-accused into the petitioner's bank account, ₹ there is no specific allegation, overt act, or incriminating material connecting the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. It is further argued that all the offences invoked are triable by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is wholly unwarranted. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a 24- year-old youth having clean antecedents and deep roots in society. It is also contended that there is an unexplained delay of about one month in the registration of the FIR, inasmuch as the alleged occurrence took place on 14.04.2026 whereas the FIR came to be registered only on 15.05.2026, thereby rendering the prosecution version prima facie doubtful. On these premises, it is prayed that the petitioner be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. 6. Per contra, the learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the present petition, and while defending the validity of the impugned order, submitted that the applicant-petitioner is not entitled to the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail given the gravity and egregious nature of the allegations leveled against him. It is further contended that the prima facie material on record underscores the necessity of custodial interrogation, thereby rendering the petition devoid of merit. It GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) -:4:- is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the present petition be dismissed out of hand. 7. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The material collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicates that the petitioner received an amount of 7,000/- from co-accused Anoop and that ₹ photographs of the victim were shared with him through social media platforms, namely Instagram and WhatsApp. The disclosure statement of the co-accused also attributes a specific role to the petitioner in the alleged occurrence. The allegations are grave in nature. The victim, Sawan, sustained serious injuries, including a grievous head injury, fracture of the arm and injuries to the leg, and it is further alleged that the assailants continued the assault even after he had fallen unconscious. Significantly, while five accused persons have been specifically named in the FIR, the involvement of four to five unidentified assailants has also been alleged. The material on record, including the financial transaction and electronic communication, prima facie connects the petitioner with the alleged offence. His custodial interrogation is, therefore, considered necessary for identifying the remaining assailants and unearthing the complete conspiracy. Consequently, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2026 (O&M) -:5:- 8. In view of the fact that the principal matter has been finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, whether ancillary to or arising out of the present proceedings, shall stand disposed of pari passu in terms of the main judgment. Consequently, no separate or further orders are required to be passed in respect thereof, and all connected interim applications are closed accordingly. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 10.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document