CRM-M-21315- IN THE H (208) SARWAN KUMA STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. R **** MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 482 of Bh for grant of pre- registered under S Nyaya Sanhita, 20 Police Station Civ 2. As p membership of un common object th family members t The allegations ag -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH KUMAR Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS P.K.S. Phoolka, Advocate for the Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh -arrest bail in case arising out of nder Sections 109, 331(6), 115(2), 32 ita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) (Section 2 n Civil Lines, Bathinda, District Bathi As per the allegations on 28.06. of unlawful assembly with the co ject thereof, they opened an attacked bers thereby causing injuries to them ons against the petitioner are that he h JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-21315-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 30.04.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA for the petitioner Punjab preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.175 dated 29.06.2025 2), 324(4), 191(3), 190 of Bharatiya ction 238 of BNS added later on) at t Bathinda. 28.06.2025, the petitioner formed e co-accused and in prosecution of acked upon the complainant and his o them after making an exhortation. at he had struck blows with a brick- 2026 oner dent nder SS”) 2025 ya n) at rmed n of d his tion. - AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-21315- bat upon the head simple injury. 3. It is a falsely implicated been opined to be punishable under S to join investigatio to be effected from On parity, he too argued that the pet 4. Per c the gravity of the deserve to be exte does not deserve to 5. This C for the parties at co 6. The p with the coaccused Gaytari, daughter been opined to be Given the nature attributed to him, -2026 (O&M) 2 e head of Gaytari daughter of the com It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. The injury that h to be simple in nature. The ingredie under Section 109 of BNS are not attra stigation. His custodial interrogation i d from him. Co-accused have already he too deserves to be extended the s the petition deserves to be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel has of the allegations as levelled agains e extended the benefit of bail. It is, th erve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner by forming members ccused is alleged to have voluntarily ghter of the complainant by throwin to be simple in nature. No recover ature of the allegations as levelled a o him, the nature of the injury sust e complainant thereby causing her a l for the petitioner that he has been that has been attributed to him has gredients for commission of offence ot attracted against him. He is ready ation is not required. No recovery is lready been extended benefit of bail. the same benefit. It is, therefore, sel has argued that keeping in view against the petitioner, he does not t is, therefore, urged that the petition ubmissions made by learned counsel mbership of an unlawful assembly tarily caused injury on the person of rowing a brick-bat. The injury has ecovery is to be effected from him. elled against the petitioner, the role y sustained by the victim and the her a been has ence eady ry is bail. fore, view not tition unsel mbly on of has him. role the AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-21315- attendant facts an pre-trial incarcerat incarceration shou consideration the ordered to be adm surrender before t 10 days from tod subsequently, as a surety bonds to th also not tamper w any witness acqua leave the country, permission from t No., Passport No Court and shall al Section 482(2) of 8. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 9. Since any, is rendered in 30.04.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 3 cts and circumstances, this Court is o arceration of the petitioner is not requ n should not be replica of post-convic n the above discussion, the petition is e admitted to bail subject to the con efore the Investigating Officer/Arresti m today and shall join investigation y, as and when required and subject to s to the satisfaction of the Investigat per with any evidence, will not pressu acquainted with the facts and circum untry, during investigation and trial of from the trial Court, shall disclose th rt No., cellphone No., while furnish hall also abide by all the terms and c (2) of BNSS. It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No rt is of the considered opinion that t required. Even otherwise pre-trial conviction sentencing. Taking into ition is allowed and the petitioner is e condition that the petitioner shall Arresting Officer within a period of igation within that period and also ject to furnishing personal as well as estigating/Arresting Officer. He will pressurize, induce, extend threats to circumstances of the case, will not trial of the case, except after seeking lose the details of his Aadhar Card furnishing bond to the learned trial s and conditions as envisaged under e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No that trial into er is shall d of also ell as will ts to l not king Card trial nder l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.