1. Since all the petitions are related to one FIR, facts and question of law involved is
same, thus, all the petitions are being decided together by a common judgment. For
brevity, the facts are being taken from CRM-M No.65602 of 2024.
2. The petitioners apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above have come up
before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
[BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.
3. Per paragraph 26 of the bail application (CRM-M-65602-2024) and the status
report dated 04.03.2025 in CRM-M-65602-2024, the accused has the following criminal
antecedents:-
4. Per paragraph 26 of the bail application (CRM-M-65603-2024), the accused has
the following criminal antecedents:-
5. Per paragraph 26 of the bail application (CRM-M-65604-2024, CRM-M-65606-
2024 and CRM-M-65607-2024), the accused has the following criminal antecedents:-
6. The facts and allegations are being taken from the status report filed by the State,
which reads as follows:
"4. That on 02.06.2024, the complainant was coming from village
Channa to Ghandabanna. At about 5 PM, when the complainant
reached near Dana Mandi of Sandhu Khurd, 15/20 persons
including accused Jagga Singh armed with rod, Balveer Singh
armed with stick, Harpreet Singh @ Chitti armed with stick,
Satnam Singh armed with stick, Ramandeep Singh armed with
hockey stick, Mandeep Singh @ Ghulla armed with stick, Gurjit
Singh (accused-petitioner) armed with angle, Princepal Singh.
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
CRM-M-65602-2024 and other connected matters
Arpan Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Gurmeet Singh, Sunnypal Singh,
Sukhpreet Singh came at the spot on bikes and encircled the
complainant. Surinderpal Singh, The accused Arpan Singh, Singh,
Gurmeet Sanipal Singh, Sukhpreet Singh and Princepal Singh
raised lalkara that today he (the complainant) will not be spared
alive. The accused caught the complainant from his arms and the
accused Jagga Singh gave a blow of his rod on complainant's left
leg, with intent to the kill him. As a result of blow, the complainant
fell down on the ground. The accused Balvir Singh gave a blow of
his stick on the left side of the complainant's back. The accused
Harpreet Singh @ Chitti gave a blow of his stick on the right side
of the complainant's back. The accused Satnam Singh gave a blow
of his stick on the right side of the complainant's back. Somehow
the complainant stood up, then the accused Ramandeep Singh
aimed a blow of his hockey stick towards the complainant's head.
The complainant tried to save himself from the said blow, therefore
he turned his head towards left side and stepped backwards too.
Upon which the said blow hit on the right knee of the complainant.
The accused Mandeep Singh @ Ghulla gave a blow of his stick on
the left hand of the complainant. The accused-petitioner gave a
blow of his angle on the biceps complainant's right arm. The
accused-petitioner of the and the co-accused gave the aforesaid
beatings to the complainant with intent to kill him. Meanwhile, the
complainant's chain and wallet containing his credit card, ATM,
licence and Rs.6500/- cash and some Driving other documents fell
down at the spot, which were not found afterwards. The other
unknown persons also gave beatings to the complainant with intent
to kill him. The complainant raised hue and cry saying "marta-
marta" upon which people gathered on the spot and the accused
ran away from the spot on their bikes along with their respective
weapons.
5. That the complainant was admitted to the Civil Hospital
Rampura. motive The behind the occurrence was that about two
years ago, there was a Kabaddi match, in which the complainant
had also participated and in the said game the complainant's team
was lost due to wrong decision of the Referee. The accused had
created nuisance at that time and the team of the complainant had
protested. Due to this grudge, the accused-petitioner in connivance
with the co-accused gave beatings to the complainant with intent to
kill him."
7. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and
contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner
and their family. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter stands compromise
between the parties and petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise is
pending before this Court and refers to Annexures P-3 and P-4.
8. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.
9. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the status report,
which read as follows:
"10. That as per the investigation conducted so far, it has
duly established that on02.06.2024, at about 5 PM, when
the complainant reached near Dana Mandi of Sandhu
Khurd, the accused-petitioner in connivance with his
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
CRM-M-65602-2024 and other connected matters
accomplices, encircled the complainant. The accused-
petitioner, in connivance with his accomplices, gave
beatings to the complainant with intent to kill him. The
accused-petitioner was armed with an angle made of iron
and he gave a blow of his angle on the biceps of the
complainant's right arm. The case property iron Angle has
been recovered from the possession of the accused-
petitioner."
10. Since the matter stands compromised and petition for quashing of FIR based on
compromise has already been filed, as such, no ground is made out to deny bail to the
petitioner. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing.
The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges,
but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage
of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or
pre-trial incarceration.
11. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie
analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there
would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this
stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar
to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioners make a case for bail.
This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official
webpage.
12. Given above, provided the petitioners are not required in any other case, the
petitioners shall be released on anticipatory bail in the FIR captioned above subject to
furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a
Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa
Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court
must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.
13. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioners shall mention the following
personal identification details:
1. AADHAR number
2. Passport number (If available) and when the
attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or
considers the accused a flight risk.
3. Mobile number (If available)
4. E-Mail id (If available)
14. This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms.
15. The petitioners are directed to join the investigation within seven days of
uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana
and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioners shall be in deemed custody
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
CRM-M-65602-2024 and other connected matters
for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The
petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or
any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as
required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking
cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioners shall not be subjected to
third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.
16. In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station
arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section
prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above,
then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added
section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding
the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the
Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioners notice of a minimum of seven
days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.
17. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioners
indulge in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an application for cancellation
of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.
18. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the
case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
19. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any
Advocate for the Petitioners can download this order along with case status from the
official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants
to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may
download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.
20. Petitions allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
25.03.2025
Jyoti Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
