CRM-M- 47764 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (103-2) PARAMJIT KAUR STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Ms. Suresha Rani Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab Mr. Tarun Kumar Sharma, **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The 482 of Bharatiya grant of anticipatory registered under Section 108 of “BNS”) at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Gurmeet Sin son Gurpreet Singh was present in his house when accused K Surjit Singh reached there and made an exhortation that they would teach a lesson to Gurpreet Singh if he did not effect compromise in the case registered against them. Hearing so, his son was scared and fled towards his fields. The accused A 47764-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision PARAMJIT KAUR Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Ms. Suresha Rani, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab Mr. Tarun Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the complainant **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No registered under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Gurmeet Singh alleging that on 28.06.2026, his son Gurpreet Singh was present in his house when accused K Surjit Singh reached there and made an exhortation that they would teach a lesson to Gurpreet Singh if he did not effect compromise in the case registered against them. Hearing so, his son was scared and fled towards his fields. The accused Amarjit Singh and Sheetal Singh started following his son IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-47764-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 26.08.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA , Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab Advocate for the complainant filed by the petitioner under Section Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for bail in case arising out of FIR No. 108 dated 10.07.2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short at Police Station Mamdot, District Ferozepur. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement gh alleging that on 28.06.2026, his son Gurpreet Singh was present in his house when accused Kikar Singh and Surjit Singh reached there and made an exhortation that they would teach a lesson to Gurpreet Singh if he did not effect compromise in the case registered against them. Hearing so, his son was scared and fled towards his marjit Singh and Sheetal Singh started following his son Section for . 108 dated 10.07.2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement gh alleging that on 28.06.2026, his kar Singh and Surjit Singh reached there and made an exhortation that they would teach a lesson to Gurpreet Singh if he did not effect compromise in the case registered against them. Hearing so, his son was scared and fled towards his marjit Singh and Sheetal Singh started following his son AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 47764 with an intent to assault him. On the same day, accused Surjit Singh, along with some unknown persons extended threats to the son of the complainant and threw brickbats all the above named persons followed Gurpreet Singh while he was on the way and extended threats. He alleged that out of anguish, his son some poisonous substance, had made a video on his phone holding the petitioner and others responsible for his death, and had died. As such, he prayed for taking action in the matter. 3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide order dated 11.08.2026. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that been falsely implicated in this ca threatened, harassed, abused or abetted suicide by the deceased. Her name had been uttered by the victim in one of the videos prepared by him. However, no specific overt act has been attributed to her and th mentioned that there was litigation between the family members of the petitioner and his family and since they were pressing for compromise that is why he has committed suicide. No specific overt act has been attributed to her. She is ready 47764-2026 (O&M) 2 with an intent to assault him. On the same day, accused Surjit Singh, along with some unknown persons extended threats to the son of the complainant and threw brickbats all the above named persons followed Gurpreet Singh while he was on the way and extended threats. He alleged that out of anguish, his son some poisonous substance, had made a video on his phone holding the and others responsible for his death, and had died. As such, he prayed for taking action in the matter. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an ation for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide order dated It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that been falsely implicated in this case. There is no allegation that she had either threatened, harassed, abused or abetted suicide by the deceased. Her name had been uttered by the victim in one of the videos prepared by him. However, no specific overt act has been attributed to her and th mentioned that there was litigation between the family members of the petitioner and his family and since they were pressing for compromise that is why he has committed suicide. No specific overt act has been attributed to her. She is ready to join investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not with an intent to assault him. On the same day, the petitioner, who is wife of accused Surjit Singh, along with some unknown persons extended threats to the son of the complainant and threw brickbats over him. On 30.06.2026 also, all the above named persons followed Gurpreet Singh while he was on the way and extended threats. He alleged that out of anguish, his son consumed some poisonous substance, had made a video on his phone holding the and others responsible for his death, and had died. As such, he After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an ation for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide order dated It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has There is no allegation that she had either threatened, harassed, abused or abetted suicide by the deceased. Her name had been uttered by the victim in one of the videos prepared by him. However, no specific overt act has been attributed to her and the victim only mentioned that there was litigation between the family members of the petitioner and his family and since they were pressing for compromise that is why he has committed suicide. No specific overt act has been attributed to to join investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not , who is wife of accused Surjit Singh, along with some unknown persons extended threats to over him. On 30.06.2026 also, all the above named persons followed Gurpreet Singh while he was on the consumed some poisonous substance, had made a video on his phone holding the and others responsible for his death, and had died. As such, he After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an ation for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide order dated he has There is no allegation that she had either threatened, harassed, abused or abetted suicide by the deceased. Her name had been uttered by the victim in one of the videos prepared by him. e victim only mentioned that there was litigation between the family members of the petitioner and his family and since they were pressing for compromise that is why he has committed suicide. No specific overt act has been attributed to to join investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 47764 required. No recovery is to be effected from her. she deserves to be extended the benefit of pre 5. Notice of motion. 6. At this stage, power of at been filed. Learned State counsel, having advance notice of the petition and assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has argued that consideration the allegations levelled against the petitioner, deserve to be extended benefit of pre 7. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 8. The petitioner along with the co threatened the victim, and brickbats were thrown at him some days prior to the occurrence. The victim is alleged to have been continuously harassed by the petitioner and the co before committing suicide wherein the The well settled proposition of law is that custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds, while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail and there migh where custodial interrogation of an accused might not be required but that does not mean that the or overlooked or he/she should be granted anticipatory bail. Reliance in this 47764-2026 (O&M) 3 required. No recovery is to be effected from her. he deserves to be extended the benefit of pre- Notice of motion. At this stage, power of attorney on behalf of the complainant has been filed. Learned State counsel, having advance notice of the petition and assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has argued that consideration the allegations levelled against the petitioner, deserve to be extended benefit of pre-arrest bail. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. The petitioner along with the co victim, and brickbats were thrown at him some days prior to the occurrence. The victim is alleged to have been continuously harassed by the petitioner and the co-accused. The victim also made a video on his cell phone before committing suicide wherein the name of the petitioner has been taken settled proposition of law is that custodial interrogation can be one relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds, while an application seeking anticipatory bail and there migh custodial interrogation of an accused might not be required but that mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored overlooked or he/she should be granted anticipatory bail. Reliance in this required. No recovery is to be effected from her. It is, therefore, argued that -arrest bail. torney on behalf of the complainant has been filed. Learned State counsel, having advance notice of the petition and assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has argued that taking into consideration the allegations levelled against the petitioner, she does not arrest bail. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have victim, and brickbats were thrown at him some days prior to the occurrence. The victim is alleged to have been continuously harassed by the accused. The victim also made a video on his cell phone name of the petitioner has been taken. settled proposition of law is that custodial interrogation can be one relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds, while an application seeking anticipatory bail and there might be cases custodial interrogation of an accused might not be required but that case against the accused should be ignored overlooked or he/she should be granted anticipatory bail. Reliance in this It is, therefore, argued that torney on behalf of the complainant has been filed. Learned State counsel, having advance notice of the petition and taking into she does not This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned accused is alleged to have victim, and brickbats were thrown at him some days prior to the occurrence. The victim is alleged to have been continuously harassed by the accused. The victim also made a video on his cell phone . settled proposition of law is that custodial interrogation can be one relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds, while t be cases custodial interrogation of an accused might not be required but that case against the accused should be ignored overlooked or he/she should be granted anticipatory bail. Reliance in this AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 47764 regard can be Court in Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & another, (2022) 17 SCC 391, wherein it was observed so and it was further held that the first foremost thing that the consider is the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the anticipatory b necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances bail would certainly not disclose all the facts within his knowledge. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, that shall leave many glaring loopho the investigation. circumstance is made out warranting exercise of powers for grant of pre bail by this Court in favour of the petitioner. The case is at it Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the same is dismissed. 47764-2026 (O&M) 4 regard can be placed upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & another, (2022) 17 wherein it was observed so and it was further held that the first foremost thing that the Court hearing an anticipatory consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. nature of the offence should be looked into along with the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the ail. However, even if custodial necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail. well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances only as a person couched in comparative safety of pre bail would certainly not disclose all the facts within his knowledge. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. In the instant case, no sparing or extra circumstance is made out warranting exercise of powers for grant of pre bail by this Court in favour of the petitioner. The case is at it Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the same is dismissed. placed upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & another, (2022) 17 wherein it was observed so and it was further held that the first and hearing an anticipatory bail application should case put up against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline interrogation is not required or grant anticipatory bail. It is also well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional only as a person couched in comparative safety of pre-arrest bail would certainly not disclose all the facts within his knowledge. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, les and gaps, thereby adversely effecting In the instant case, no sparing or extra-ordinary circumstance is made out warranting exercise of powers for grant of pre-arrest bail by this Court in favour of the petitioner. The case is at its nascent stage. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the placed upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Sumitha Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & another, (2022) 17 and should Thereafter, the severity of the grounds to decline interrogation is not required or also well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional arrest bail would certainly not disclose all the facts within his knowledge. In case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, les and gaps, thereby adversely effecting ordinary arrest s nascent stage. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly the AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 47764 9. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. 10. Since the main petition has been if any, is rendered infructuou 26.08.2026 Amit Sharma 47764-2026 (O&M) 5 It is, however, clarified that the observations made above not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the pending application, AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.27 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.