CRM-25079-2026 IN/& CRM-M-15412-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102+216 CRM-25079-2026 IN/& CRM-M-15412-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:08.07.2026 CXXXXXX ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present: Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG Punjab. SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J . (Oral) : CRM-25079-2026 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is hereby allowed. The documents annexed with the application are ordered to be taken on record as Annexures P-6 & P-7. CRM-M-15412-2026 For the commission of offence punishable under Sections 109, 126(2), 132, 221, 303(2), 190, 191(3) [Sections 115(2), 118(1), 117(3), 110, 118(2) and 117(2) added later on] of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, hereinafter being referred to as ‘BNS’ only and Section 27 of Arms Act, the FIR No.22 dated 27.02.2025, has been lodged in Police Station City Batala, District Batala/Gurdaspur. In the above mentioned case, the petitioner is MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.09 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-25079-2026 IN/& CRM-M-15412-2026 2 apprehending arrest, and therefore, for the benefit of anticipatory bail he has approached this Court, by virtue of present petition under Section 482 of ‘Bharatiya Nagrik Surakhsa Sanhita 2023’. 2. In nut-shell the facts emerging from record are that the FIR of this case came into being at the instance of ‘Kamala Bhatti’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above named complainant that on 26.02.2025 at about 8-8.30 P.M. when he was present near the temple, his friends, namely ‘Rajinder Singh @ Raja Walia’ and ‘Satinderpal Singh @ Lucky’, came on a two wheeler, and that they were waylaid by a group of assailants armed with various weapons, such as sickles and sword. According to complainant in the above mentioned assault multiple injuries were inflicted on the person of ‘Rajinder Singh’ and ‘Satinderpal Singh’. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that in view of above mentioned complaint formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. 4. Heard. 5. The learned State counsel has filed status report. The same be taken on record. 6. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that he is a juvenile. According to learned counsel for the petitioner in order to prove age of the petitioner the copy of Birth Certificate (Annexure P-6) and Middle School Certificate (Annexure P-7) have been placed on record, MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.09 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-25079-2026 IN/& CRM-M-15412-2026 3 wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 15.07.2009. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and that custodial interrogation of petitioner, being juvenile, is not possible. 7. The learned State counsel while referring to be para No.13 of the status report filed by the State has contended that a prominent and active role has been attributed to the petitioner in the commission of crime. According to learned counsel for the petitioner it has been specifically mentioned in the FIR that at the time of commission of offence the petitioner was carrying a sharp edged weapon. In view of above, the learned State counsel has sought for dismissal of instant petition. 8. The record has been perused carefully. 9. A perusal of the record shows that there are several factors which are required to be taken into consideration at this stage. Those factors are:- i) that admittedly the petitioner at the time of commission of offence was below the age of 16. Thus, he was a juvenile-in- conflict-with-law; ii) that the recovery of weapon of offence can be facilitated by issuing a direction to the investigating officer to join the petitioner in investigation of this case, while following the necessary safeguards available to a juvenile; iii) that the petitioner has clean antecedents; iv) that the investigation and trial of the case are not likely to be concluded in near future; v) that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not likely to produce a fruitful result; MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.09 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-25079-2026 IN/& CRM-M-15412-2026 4 vi) that the detention of petitioner in judicial lock-up is not likely to serve any purpose; vii) that there is nothing on record to show that while on anticipatory bail, the petitioner is likely to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses; and viii) that there is nothing on record to show that if released on bail, the petitioner will not participate/cooperate in the trial. 10. If the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors, involved in the instant case, is taken into consideration, it leads to a conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail, and that the present petition deserves to be allowed. 11. In view of above-mentioned discussions, the present petition is hereby allowed and the petitioner is accorded the benefit of anticipatory bail. It is hereby directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of arresting officer. However, in the meantime the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when notice is served upon him, in writing, by the Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE 08.07.2026 Manoj Bhutani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.09 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document