Mehal Singh vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 2634 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mehal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 18 March, 2026

Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi

Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi

CRM-M-66891-2025                                              -1-

106
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH
                                    CRM-M-66891-2025
                              Date of decision :18.03.2026

MEHAL SINGH
                                                             ... Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                            ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:     Mr. Ankur Mittal, Sr. Advocate with
             Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate
             Mr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate and
             Mr. Sakal Sikri, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

             Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate
             for the complainant.

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL)

The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of

BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail in case DDR No.0002 dated

16.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) registered under Sections

307,323,336,148,149 and Sections 25, 54, 57 and 59 of Arms Act at

Police Station Fatehgarh Panjtoor, District Moga in FIR No.0056 dated

15.09.2023 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 452, 323, 506,

427, 336, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Fatehgarh Panjtoor, District

Moga.

2. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that

the petitioner was found to be innocent. However, he has been

summoned under Section 190 Cr.P.C. In terms of the order dated

1 of 6

28.11.2025, he has been directed to join investigation. He has appeared

before the concerned Court and has been granted the concession of

interim anticipatory bail. He, therefore prays that his interim bail be

confirmed.

3. On the other hand, the learned State counsel admits that the

petitioner was exonerated during the course of investigation and has

been summoned to face trial under Section 190 Cr.P.C.

4. The learned counsel for the complainant contends that the

petitioner has been exonerated only after he had joined a particular

dispensation in the State of Punjab. Therefore, his exoneration is bad and

therefore, the anticipatory bail granted to him is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. On 28.11.2025, the following order was passed:-

"Petitioner, who is accused in DDR No.0002 dated 16.09.2023 registered against him and others (arising out of FIR No.0056 dated 15.09.2023), for commission of offences punishable under Sections 307,323,336,148,149 IPC and Section 25, 54, 57, 59 of Arms Act registered at P.S Fatehgarh Panjtoor, District Moga, has filed the instant petition, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail.

Relevant facts as emerging from the documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:-

In the late evening of 14.09.2023, on receipt of ruqa from the hospital regarding admission of injured, police officials arrived at the hospital and sought permission of the Doctor on duty to record the statement of Gurjeet Kaur, who had suffered four injuries (all of which have since been declared as 'Simple in nature). Even though Doctor had opined her fit, she did not get her statement recorded on the same

2 of 6

evening. Rather, her husband Jarnail Singh (brother of the petitioner) filed a complaint on 15.09.2023 levelling serious allegations against Gurjeet Kaur, her brother Gurmit Singh and others. Consequently, a formal case vide FIR No.0056 dated 15.09.2023 was registered against Gurmit Singh, Gurjeet Kaur and others under Sections 452,323,506,427,336,148,149 IPC.

In his statement, Jarnail Singh alleged that he was married to Gurjeet Kaur in 2002. Their married life was not smooth due to temperamental differences. At about 5.15 pm on 14.09.2023, about 15-20 persons arrived at his residence, including brother of his wife namely, Gurmit Singh, all of whom were armed with baseball bats and stick etc. They forcibly entered the house and unleashed an attack in which he was mercilessly assaulted and the household articles were badly damaged. In this incident, Jarnail Singh further alleged that he suffered multiple injuries. Kiranpreet Kaur who had rushed to his rescue was also assaulted. Both the injured were rushed to the hospital.

At about 2.45 am on 16.09.2023, DDR No.0002 was registered at the instance of Gurmit Singh (brother of Gurjeet Kaur) against the present petitioner Mehal Singh, Sewa Singh, Beant Singh, Kiranpreet Kaur etc. Gurmit Singh in his complaint alleged that his brother-in-law Jarnail Singh and family members had been pressuring Gurjeet Kaur to consent to second marriage of Jarnail Singh, as the couple had only two daughters. When Gurjeet Kaur refused, she was assaulted and an attempt was made to forcibly administer poison to her. She resisted. Her in- laws were not successful. When he (Gurmit Singh, brother of Gurjeet Kaur) tried to intervene, gun shots were fired at him. He suffered serious injuries. It was further alleged by Gurmit Singh that the present petitioner raised lalkara and exhorted others to finish Gurjeet Kaur. He also gave kick

3 of 6

blows on her stomach etc while Sewa Singh and Kiranpreet Kaur tried to force her to consume poison.

On the basis of said complaint, aforesaid DDR No.0002 dated 16.09.2023 was registered against the petitioner and others under Section 307 IPC. Police Authorities carried out investigation and were of the opinion that the petitioner, Sewa Singh and Beant Singh were not present at the spot. Resultantly, these three were declared innocent and were kept in column No.2. On culmination of investigation in case FIR No.0056, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C was prepared against Sukhdev Singh and others. It further emerges from the documents on record that being aggrieved of the action of the Investigating Officer vide which the petitioner, Sewa Singh and Beant Singh were found innocent, complainant party (Gurmit Singh, Gurjeet Kaur and others) filed a petition bearing CRM-M-55144- 2024 requesting for independent investigation. Since the final report had already been prepared, aforesaid petition was disposed of with the liberty to the complainant party to pursue their remedy before the learned trial Court. Another petition bearing CRM-M-11359-2025 filed by Gurmit Singh and Gurjeet Kaur, was also disposed of, in terms of order dated 28.02.2025 vide which learned Magistrate was directed to consider all the reports and objections raised against the investigation while deciding application under Section 210 of BNSS.

Invoking the provisions under Section 210 of BNSS, petitioner was summoned by the learned Magistrate to face trial for the commission of offence punishable under Section 307,323,336,148,149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act along with Sewa Singh and Beant Singh etc. Admittedly, said order has also been assailed by the petitioner vide CRM-M-50403-2025 wherein notice of motion has been issued.

4 of 6

Apprehending his arrest, petitioner approached the learned Sessions Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Same came to be dismissed vide order dated 31.10.2025. Aggrieved of which, present petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the factual backdrop of the case as stated hereinabove, it is clear that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. CCTV footage collected from the site indicates that the petitioner was not present at the site. For the said reason, he was kept in column No.2. Further, the falsity of the case set up by the complainant party, namely, Gurmit Singh is apparent from the fact that though Gurjeet Kaur, who had suffered only simple injuries in the incident was opined 'fit' by the treating Doctor, however, when the police Authorities reached at the hospital, she did not lodge any complaint. Rather, the brother of the petitioner i.e husband of Gurjeet Kaur, namely, Jarnail Singh was the first to get criminal proceedings initiated by lodging FIR No.56 dated 15.09.2023 against Gurmit Singh and Others under Sections 452,323,306,336,427,148,149 IPC. Only as a counter blast thereto and with a view to level scores with Jarnail Singh and his family members, DDR No.0002 dated 16.09.2023 was lodged by giving an exaggerated and colored version. Even no material has been placed on record to prove that gun shot was fired.

The next leg of submission raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that even if for the sake of arguments the story as putforth by the complainant is taken to be true at its face value (though not admitted), the only role attributed to the petitioner is that he raised lalkara as also gave kick blows to his sister-in-law Gurjeet Kaur on her stomach and leg. Learned counsel contends that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner, who is, nonetheless ready and willing to join investigation as and when called upon to do so. Notice of motion for 22.01.2026.

5 of 6

Meanwhile, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioner is hereby directed to join investigation within seven days from today and cooperate in the same. In the event of the arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on interim bail on her furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. He shall also abide by conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS."

7. In deference to the aforementioned order, the petitioner has

appeared before the concerned Court and has been granted the

concession of interim anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the bail granted to the petitioner is

confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds and surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the Trial Court.

9. Disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 18.03.2026 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No

Whether reportable:- Yes/No

6 of 6