CRM-M No.34395 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 212 CRM-M No.34395 of 2026 Date of decision: 20.07.2026 Jaswinder Singh @ Binder ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajdeep Singh Gill, Advocate, for the complainant. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. Learned State counsel has placed on record status report while submitting that the petitioner has joined investigation on 24.06.2026 and has got recovered a danda. It is submitted by her that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to unearth the complete conspiracy, confront him with the co-accused and to ascertain the whereabouts of the co-accused Parvinder Singh @ Jassi and Harjinder MANJU 2026.07.21 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34395 of 2026 -2- Singh who are yet to be arrested and the petitioner has not extended cooperation in this regard. It is, therefore, argued that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. 2. At this stage, Power of Attorney on behalf of the complainant has been filed and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel has submitted that the victim Dalvir Singh had sustained serious injuries at the hands of the petitioner and the co-accused who formed membership of an unlawful assembly. The injury so sustained by him has been opined to be serious in nature. The active complicity of the petitioner in the crime stands established and it is, therefore, argued that he does not deserve to be extended benefit of pre arrest bail. 3. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 4. The petitioner by forming membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused is alleged to have caused injuries on the person of the complainant and his brother Dalvir Singh. Dalvir Singh had sustained injuries on his head which have not been attributed to the petitioner but have been opined to be serious in nature. It is well settled proposition of law that in cases of group violence, individual roles must be specifically established and mere presence at the scene of crime cannot impute the same level of culpability to all the accused. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries as well as part attributed to the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial MANJU 2026.07.21 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34395 of 2026 -3- interrogation of the petitioner is not required. With regard to contention that the petitioner has not co-operated with the investigation, it may be stated that the behaviour attributed to the petitioner cannot be considered as an instance of non-cooperation, justifying denial for grant of pre-arrest bail since, an accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. The purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to satisfactorily divulge self incriminating information. As such, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 22.06.2026, granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. 5. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 20.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.21 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh