CRM-M No.27473 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 ***** CRM-M No.27473 of 2026 Date of decision : 17.7.2026 Date of uploading : 18.7.2026 Devish ………….Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Jagjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Priyanka Sadar, Senior DAG, Haryana --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. On 15.5.2026, the following order was passed: ‘1. This is the 1st petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 438 Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.252 dated 28.08.2025, registered under Sections 109(1), 115, 126, 190, 191(3), 333, 351(3) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 307, 323, 341, 149, 148, 452, 506 and 120-B IPC) at Police Station Gadpuri, District Palwal, Haryana. During the course of investigation, Sections 109(1), 190 and 191(3) of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 307, 149 and 148 IPC) were deleted and Sections 3(5), 238(1), 117(2) and 110 of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 34, 201, 325 and 308 IPC) were added in the aforesaid FIR. 2. Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant/injured Laxman alias Kallu, who alleged that on 27.08.2025, after getting his medical examination conducted and while he along with his brother Premchand was returning on a motorcycle, a car allegedly hit their motorcycle from behind near Shiv Mandir, Chandpur. It is alleged that thereafter 15-16 persons, who had come in three vehicles and were ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.18 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.27473 of 2026 -2- armed with pistols, axes, hammers and rods, attacked the complainant and his brother with an intention to kill them. The complainant specifically named Sandeep alias Daulat, Bhola, Chatar Singh, Bhagat and Ajay as assailants and alleged that they inflicted injuries upon both the brothers. It was further alleged that due to previous Panchayat election rivalry, the accused persons had committed the occurrence and thereafter fled away from the spot after extending threats to kill them. The injured were initially taken to Government Hospital, Palwal and thereafter, referred to Sarvodaya Hospital, Faridabad for treatment. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named either by the complainant or by the other injured in their respective statements and he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of disclosure statements allegedly suffered by co-accused Sandeep and Rupesh. It is further contended that as per the allegations emerging from the disclosure statements, the only role attributed to the petitioner is that he inflicted an injury on the left hand/elbow of injured Prem. Learned counsel further submits that the said injury has not been declared dangerous to life and during investigation Section 109(1) BNS (erstwhile Section 307 IPC) has already been deleted from the FIR. It is argued that the offence attributable to the petitioner would, at the most, fall under Section 117(2) BNS (erstwhile Section 325 IPC), which is a bailable offence. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. It is also submitted that other co-accused persons are already on regular bail and even the main accused namely Jatinder Singh has also been granted the concession of regular bail. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that injured Prem suffered four injuries and all the injuries have been declared grievous in nature. It is argued that injury No.3 on the left elbow of injured Prem has been specifically attributed to the present petitioner. Though the petitioner has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused persons, however, he was very much present at the spot and actively participated in the occurrence. Learned State counsel, however, does not dispute the fact that the other co-accused persons, including the main ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.18 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.27473 of 2026 -3- accused Jatinder Singh, are on regular bail. 6. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court notices that the petitioner has not been named either by the complainant or by the injured in their statements and his nomination in the present case is stated to be on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused persons. The specific role attributed to the petitioner is regarding inflicting an injury on the left elbow/hand of injured Prem, which allegedly attracts Section 117(2) BNS (erstwhile Section 325 IPC), added during investigation, whereas Section 109(1) BNS (erstwhile Section 307 IPC) already stands deleted. The petitioner has expressed his willingness to join the investigation and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. It is also not disputed that the other co-accused persons, including the main accused Jatinder Singh, are already on regular bail. 7. In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023. 8. List on 17.07.2026.’ 2. Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 15.5.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation. 3. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. Interim order dated 15.5.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 4. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 5. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.18 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.27473 of 2026 -4- cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause. 6. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 17.7.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.18 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document