CRM-M-51353 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (112) NAVNEET PUNDIR STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mr. Apoorv Garg, A **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The 482 of Bharatiya grant of anticipatory registered under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of short “BNS”) District Kurukshetra. 2. The recorded by complainant evening of 10th of June, where the accused Maninder Singh having previous enmity started a verbal altercation altercation, he took out a country 51353-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision NAVNEET PUNDIR Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Apoorv Garg, Addl. AG, Haryana **** 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 Sections 109(1), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of st recorded by complainant, Gulshan alias Gullu, alleging therein that on the evening of 10th of June, 2026, he had reached at the bus stand of Ismailabad, where the accused Maninder Singh was already present having previous enmity. He was accompanied by co started a verbal altercation with the complainant. altercation, he took out a country-made pistol from his waistband and pointed IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-51353-2026 (O&M) Date of decision 10.09.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Advocate for the petitioner AG, Haryana filed by the petitioner under Section Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for bail in case arising out of FIR No.165 dated 11.06.2026 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Ismailabad, aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement Gulshan alias Gullu, alleging therein that on the , he had reached at the bus stand of Ismailabad, was already present, with whom he was He was accompanied by co-accused Cheema. He the complainant. He the complainant. During the course of made pistol from his waistband and pointed Section for 165 dated 11.06.2026 2023 (for and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Ismailabad, atement Gulshan alias Gullu, alleging therein that on the , he had reached at the bus stand of Ismailabad, m he was He During the course of made pistol from his waistband and pointed AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-51353 the same towards him with an intent to kill him. Out of fear, the complainant started running place, started following them. Accused Maninder Singh made an exhortation to fire shot upon the complainant, and then accused Ulfat Singh fired two shots with a country had fallen down. The assailants then fled away from the spot. 3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The accused Maninder Singh and Satwinder Singh were arrested. They suffered disclosure st Sharma alias Sunny was nominated as accused and was arrested. He suffered disclosure statement to the effect that the pistol used in the crime had been purchased by him along with 12 cartridges from the present was given to the accused Maninder Singh by him for a sum of petitioner was nominated as additional accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshe dated 17.08.2026 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of the co accused, which cannot was not one amongst the assailants and was not named in the FIR. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required 51353-2026 (O&M) 2 the same towards him with an intent to kill him. Out of fear, the complainant started running. Accused Ulfat Singh, who was sitting in a car at the same place, started following them. Accused Maninder Singh made an exhortation to fire shot upon the complainant, and then accused Ulfat Singh fired two shots with a country-made pistol, one of which h had fallen down. The assailants then fled away from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The accused Maninder Singh and Satwinder Singh were arrested. They suffered disclosure statement, on the basis of which accused Karan Sharma alias Sunny was nominated as accused and was arrested. He suffered disclosure statement to the effect that the pistol used in the crime had been purchased by him along with 12 cartridges from the present was given to the accused Maninder Singh by him for a sum of petitioner was nominated as additional accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshe dated 17.08.2026. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of the co accused, which cannot be considered to be legally admissible in evidence. He was not one amongst the assailants and was not named in the FIR. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required the same towards him with an intent to kill him. Out of fear, the complainant . Accused Ulfat Singh, who was sitting in a car at the same place, started following them. Accused Maninder Singh made an exhortation to fire shot upon the complainant, and then accused Ulfat Singh fired two made pistol, one of which had hit him at his back, and he had fallen down. The assailants then fled away from the spot. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The accused Maninder Singh and Satwinder Singh were arrested. atement, on the basis of which accused Karan Sharma alias Sunny was nominated as accused and was arrested. He suffered disclosure statement to the effect that the pistol used in the crime had been purchased by him along with 12 cartridges from the present petitioner, and was given to the accused Maninder Singh by him for a sum of ₹60,000. The petitioner was nominated as additional accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, vide order It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of the co- be considered to be legally admissible in evidence. He was not one amongst the assailants and was not named in the FIR. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery the same towards him with an intent to kill him. Out of fear, the complainant . Accused Ulfat Singh, who was sitting in a car at the same place, started following them. Accused Maninder Singh made an exhortation to fire shot upon the complainant, and then accused Ulfat Singh fired two his back, and he After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The accused Maninder Singh and Satwinder Singh were arrested. atement, on the basis of which accused Karan Sharma alias Sunny was nominated as accused and was arrested. He suffered disclosure statement to the effect that the pistol used in the crime had been petitioner, and The petitioner was nominated as additional accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed tra, vide order It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been - be considered to be legally admissible in evidence. He was not one amongst the assailants and was not named in the FIR. He is ready recovery AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-51353 is to be effected from him. It is to be allowed. 5. Notice of motion. 6. Learned State counsel has advance has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. His antecedents are no investigation in the matter and to know the source from which the illicit weapon had been originally procured, his custodial interrogation is must. There is no exceptional circumstance to exercise powers for gr arrest bail. It is allowed. 7. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 8. The petitioner is alleged to have supplied an illicit weapon cartridges to the co accused Satwinder Singh and Maninder Singh, who is alleged to have used the same for the purpose of causing injuries to the complainant with an intent to commit his murder. as leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of conducting a thorough investigation. anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances 51353-2026 (O&M) 3 is to be effected from him. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition deserves to be allowed. Notice of motion. Learned State counsel has advance has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. His antecedents are not clean. For the purpose of conducting proper investigation in the matter and to know the source from which the illicit weapon had been originally procured, his custodial interrogation is must. There is no exceptional circumstance to exercise powers for gr arrest bail. It is, therefore, argued that the petitioner does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is alleged to have supplied an illicit weapon cartridges to the co-accused Karan Sharma, who had given the same to the accused Satwinder Singh and Maninder Singh, who is alleged to have used the same for the purpose of causing injuries to the complainant with an intent to commit his murder. Taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of conducting a thorough investigation. The case is at its nascent stage. It is well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances stressed that the petition deserves Learned State counsel has advance notice of the petition and has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. t clean. For the purpose of conducting proper investigation in the matter and to know the source from which the illicit weapon had been originally procured, his custodial interrogation is must. There is no exceptional circumstance to exercise powers for grant of pre- argued that the petitioner does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned The petitioner is alleged to have supplied an illicit weapon and accused Karan Sharma, who had given the same to the accused Satwinder Singh and Maninder Singh, who is alleged to have used the same for the purpose of causing injuries to the complainant with an intent g into consideration the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of conducting a The case is at its nascent stage. It is well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances stressed that the petition deserves notice of the petition and has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. t clean. For the purpose of conducting proper investigation in the matter and to know the source from which the illicit weapon had been originally procured, his custodial interrogation is must. - argued that the petitioner does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned and accused Karan Sharma, who had given the same to the accused Satwinder Singh and Maninder Singh, who is alleged to have used the same for the purpose of causing injuries to the complainant with an intent g into consideration the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that his custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of conducting a The case is at its nascent stage. It is well settled that anticipatory bail to an accused can be granted in exceptional circumstances AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-51353 only as a person couched in comparative safety of pre certainly not disclose all the facts within his kn interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see that an order of anticipato bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for grant of pre-arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court in extra exceptional cir consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra ordinary circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as petitioner. 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. 9. It is, however, clarified that the observations mad 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 in 10.09.2026 Amit Sharma 51353-2026 (O&M) 4 only as a person couched in comparative safety of pre certainly not disclose all the facts within his kn interrogation of the petitioner is denied to the Investigating Agency, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see that an order of anticipato bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court in extra exceptional circumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra ordinary circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as petitioner. 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. It is, however, clarified that the observations mad 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 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, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby adversely effecting the investigation. The Court is also required to see that an order of anticipatory bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for arrest bail are to be exercised by the Court in extra-ordinary and cumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the conviction may entail. In the instant case, no such exceptional or extra- ordinary circumstance is, however, made out from the pleas as taken by the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 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 arrest bail would owledge. 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 ry bail does not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. It is well settled proposition of law that the powers for ordinary and cumstances and with great caution while taking into consideration the nature of the accusation and the sentence which the - taken by the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be dismissed. e above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the pending application, AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.