Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32992 (PNJ)

BOHAR SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/34362/2026 · 2026-07-22

N S Shekhawat

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-34362-2026(O&M) -1- 103 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34362-2026(O&M) Date of Decision: 22.07.2026 Bohar Singh …Petitioner vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.M.S.Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (438 of Cr.P.C.) with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.125 dated 15.07.2025, registered under Sections 333, 118(1), 115(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS (Corresponding Sections 452, 324, 323, 148, 149 of IPC) and Sections 238, 117(1), 118(2) of BNS (Corresponding Sections 201, 322, 326 of IPC) added later on, at Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. 2. As per prosecution, the FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Mandar Singh and the same has been reproduced below:- "Statement of Mandar Singh, son of Nihal Singh, son of Sucha Singh, resident of Ward No. 3, Thadewala Road, Village Sanghudhan, Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib, age about 55 years, mobile number 96915-00056. Statement made that I am HEMLATA 2026.07.23 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34362-2026(O&M) -2- a resident of the above-mentioned address and I work as a laborer. On 10-07-2025, my entire family had gone to pay obeisance at Lagge Aane Nigaahe Babe near Bagha Purana, and I was alone at home. At about 10:00 PM, after eating food and water, I locked the main gate of my house from inside the boundary wall and lay down on a cot in the courtyard. The light of our house was on. In front of my eyes, Mandeep Singh son of Bohar Singh, armed with a sharp- edged weapon (Kapa), jumped over the wall and entered my house and opened the main gate. I immediately stood up on the cot. Then, before my eyes, Bohar Singh son of Daroga Singh armed with a kirpan, Hardeep Kaur wife of Bohar Singh armed with an iron rod, along with 4-5 unidentified persons armed with weapons, entered my house. I can identify those unidentified persons if brought before me. At that time, Hardeep Kaur loudly shouted that "do not leave him alive today." Thereupon, Mandeep Singh struck a blow with the sharp- edged Kapa on my head, which hit the right side of my head. Then Bohar Singh struck another blow with his kirpan towards my head, which hit the left side of my head. Meanwhile, Hardeep Kaur attacked me with her iron weapon, which struck my left shoulder. I fell face down on the ground. Then the unidentified persons, who had baseball bats and sticks, attacked my body, due to which my left arm above the wrist and elbow was badly fractured and someone struck sharp-edged blows below my waist/back side. I raised cries of "I am dying, I am dying." Then my nephew Binder Singh son of Darshan Singh and Sonu son of Raja Singh, residents of Sanghudhan, came there. Seeing them coming, the said persons fled from the spot along with their weapons. Thereafter, Sonu and Binder Singh arranged a vehicle and admitted me to Civil Hospital Sri Muktsar Sahib for treatment. During treatment, as my injuries were serious, the doctor at Civil Hospital advised the persons accompanying me to take me to some better hospital. Thereupon, Sonu and Binder Singh arranged a vehicle and took me for treatment to AIIMS Hospital Bathinda. After giving treatment for some time, they also advised taking me HEMLATA 2026.07.23 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34362-2026(O&M) -3- to another better hospital. Then my companions arranged a vehicle and admitted me for treatment at Wadhwa Hospital, Malout Road Bathinda Bypass, Sri Muktsar Sahib, where my treatment is continuing. The reason for this occurrence is that these accused persons had earlier quarreled with my elder brother, and I used to support my brother. Later, the village panchayat intervened and got a compromise effected between my brother and these accused persons. But now, due to that grudge, they came to my house and caused injuries to me. Legal action should be taken against them. I have got this statement written, read it, understood it, and it is correct. Signature/- Mandar Singh.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and the allegations levelled in the FIR are highly exaggerated. He further submits that initially, the petitioner had applied for grant of concession of bail and was granted the concession of bail as the opinion with regard to the nature of injury has not been obtained, at this stage. He further submits that the exact role and the attribution of injuries are matters of evidence and, therefore, cannot be relied upon at this stage for grant of the concession of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was carrying a Kirpan (sword) and gave a blow on the left side of head of the complainant and the said injury has been declared to be grievous in nature. Keeping in view the gravity of the offence, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. HEMLATA 2026.07.23 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34362-2026(O&M) -4- 6. As per the case set up by the prosecution, the petitioner was carrying a kirpan (sword) in his hand and gave a blow on the left side of head of the complainant, which resulted in a fracture. Consequently, the injury attributed to the petitioner led to the addition of Section 118(2) of BNS in the present case. 7. Keeping in view the gravity of offence, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. Moreover, the weapon of offence is yet to be recovered and, in the considered opinion of this Court, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required for the purpose of a fair and effective investigation. 8. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed. 9. Pending application stands also disposed of. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 22.07.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.07.23 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document