CRM-M-30286-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 CRM-M-30286-2026 (O&M) Date of decision:23.07.2026 Diwan Chand ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. ... Manisha Batra, J. (Oral). 1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking benefit of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.125, dated 08.05.2026, registered under Sections 190, 191(3), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2) and 299 of the BNS (offence under Sections 109 and 140(1) of the BNS were added lateron), at Police Station Chhachhrauli, District Yamuna Nagar. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint submitted by the complainant – Amandeep Singh, alleging therein that on 29.04.2026, he along with his brother Harshdeep had gone to his agricultural land for the purpose of running tubewell. Sometime thereafter, the petitioner along with some other persons reached there and started throwing torch light on the face of the complainant. The complainant asked them the reason for doing so and then they started hurling abuses to the HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30286-2026 (O&M) -2- complainant. Thereafter, they called the co-accused and some unknown persons, who reached there, while being armed with dandas, lathis and iron rods etc. While making fun of Sikh religion of the complainant and by catching hold of his hair and dragging them, the petitioner and co-accused took them towards the house of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat village Ganola. They disrespected the turbans of the complainant and his brother and tried to set them on fire by sprinkling petrol over them. They had even prepared a video of the incident and made the same viral on 03.05.2026. The complainant, therefore, prayed for taking action against the culprits. 3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated and the same are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which had been dismissed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar vide order dated 19.05.2026. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the has been falsely implicated in this case. There is inordinate and explained delay in lodging of the FIR. A false story has been concocted. There is no medical evidence on record to show that any injury endangering the lives of the victims had been sustained at the hands of the petitioner or other accused. The ingredients for commission of offences punishable under Sections 109 and 140(1) of the BNS are not at all attracted. He is ready to join the investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is, therefore, urged that he deserves to be extended the benefit of pre-arrest bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30286-2026 (O&M) -3- serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. The video of the occurrence had been made viral on internet by the petitioner and co-accused to disgrace the feelings of Sikh religion. The petitioner was very much seen in the said video while carrying a danda and causing injuries to the victims. The victims were attacked by a mob while being armed with weapons. For the purpose of conducting thorough and proper investigation in the matter, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. He has failed to show any exceptional or extraordinary circumstance for exercise powers for grant of anticipatory bail to him. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserved to be allowed. 6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The petitioner by forming membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused is alleged to have assaulted the complainant and his brother, to have voluntarily caused injuries to them and is further alleged to have made an attempt to kill and abduct them by wrongfully confining them. The allegations make out a prima facie case for commission of subject offences as against the petitioner. For the purpose conducting deeper and thorough probe into the matter, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. It is well settled proposition of law that powers for grant of anticipatory bail should be exercised in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and not in routine manner. No such circumstance, however, has been made out in this case. If the petitioner is given the shield of anticipatory bail that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely affecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see that HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30286-2026 (O&M) -4- an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. Accordingly, finding no compelling ground to allow the petition, the same is dismissed. 8. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) 23.07.2026 JUDGE harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document