[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbir Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 March, 2026
CRM-M-71895-2025 1
137
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-71895-2025
DECIDED ON: 23.03.2026
GURBIR SINGH .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR .....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present: Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, and
Mr. Dushant Dhawan, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Jigyasa Kharbanda, Advocate,
for the complainant.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J (ORAL)
1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,
2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First
Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
Name & age FIR Date Section(s) Police District
of Petitioner No. Station
(s)
Gurbir 0278 27.11.2025 353(2), 356(2), Sadar Tarn Tarn Taran
Singh, aged 352 of BNS, Taran
about 50 2023
years
2. After hearing the submissions addressed by counsel for the
petitioner, on 19.12.2025, following order was passed:-
"2. Incident in question allegedly occurred
when the complainant, Karamveer Singh, Advocate,
was arguing a bail application before the Court of
Sessions at Tarn Taran on behalf of accused Tejbir
Singh. During the course of the proceedings, it is
alleged that petitioner, Gurbir Singh, who is a
Government employee, used derogatory language
against the complainant, thereby not only showing
disrespect to the legal profession but also bringing
disrepute to it, that too, while the proceedings were
being conducted in open Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner,
however, contends that even if the allegations are
taken at their face value, that petitioner addressed the
complainant, Karamveer Singh, as a "Khalistani",
same would not constitute any offence. It is further
submitted that petitioner's application for anticipatory
bail has already been dismissed by learned Judge,
Special Court, Tarn Taran, while observing that
petitioner had used highly defamatory and scandalous
language with the intent to scandalize the entire
judicial structure of the country.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that, in view of the nature of allegations,
custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not
serve any meaningful purpose. Thus, prayer is made
for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in the present case.
5. Notice of motion.
6. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan,
Sr. DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the
respondent - State, and Mr. Harjot Singh Mann,
Advocate, puts in appearance (through VC mode)
along with Ms. Jigyasa Kharbanda, Advocate, who is
present in the Court, on behalf of the complainant, and
files his vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken
on record.
7. Before proceeding further, this Court
deems it appropriate to direct both the complainant -
Karamveer Singh and petitioner - Gurbir Singh, to
appear before this Court on the next date of hearing,
i.e. 24.12.2025.
8. Let the present petition be taken up as the
last case of the day or at 2:00 p.m., whichever is
earlier, on the aforesaid date.
9. Meanwhile, petitioner shall not be
arrested. However, issue of joining of investigation by
the petitioner would be examined on the next date of
hearing, after reviewing the status report, which is yet
to be filed by learned State counsel."
3. On 24.12.2025, when complainant-Karamveer Singh,
appeared through his counsel, Mr. Harjot Singh Mann, he was impleaded
as respondent No.2 in the present petition.
Thereafter, with a view to explore the possibility of an
amicable settlement, the matter was referred to the Mediation and
Conciliation Centre of this Court, while granting interim protection to the
petitioner from arrest.
4. Pursuant to the said reference, complainant initially
expressed his willingness to resolve the dispute through mediation and
conveyed that he was not averse to participating in the mediation
proceedings.
5. However, as per the report dated 11.02.2026 received from
Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, the matter remained
unsettled.
Further, the report indicates that complainant failed to appear
before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court after attending
the proceedings on the first two dates.
6. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties and has carefully perused the record available
before it.
7. Considering the conduct of the parties, it appears that the
issue is being unnecessarily prolonged on one pretext or another, whereas
the matter warrants expeditious disposal in accordance with law.
8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the allegations
levelled in the present case, and upon forming a prima facie opinion, this
Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is
unlikely to serve any meaningful purpose in furtherance of the
prosecution case.
9. Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of, with a
direction to the petitioner to join the investigation within two weeks from
today, or as and when called by the investigating agency, and in the
eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail,
subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down
under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
10. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his
passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he
possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that
he does not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during
trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.
11. With the directions recorded here above, present petition
stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
23.03.2026 JUDGE
Lavisha
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
