Bharat Kumar @ Bharat v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Date of Decision:- 13.03.2026 Bharat Kumar @ Bharat ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Ms. Ramandeep Kaur Brar, Advocate for Mr. Monty Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.1 dated 01.01.2025, registered under Sections 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3) and 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [Section 118(2) of BNS added later on] at Police Station Daba, District Ludhiana, Police Commissionerate Ludhiana 2.

The aforementioned FIR has been registered on the basis of the statement recorded by complainant Simranjeet Singh alleging therein that on 08.12.2024, he was standing in the street of his house along with his friend Gursewak Singh, when the petitioner along with co-accused and some unknown persons reached there and attacked both of them. They extended beatings to them. The petitioner struck a blow with an iron Daat on complainant's head. Accused Sunny and Jeeti struck blows with iron Daat on complainant's leg. Complainant's friend Gursewak Singh also sustained injuries at the hands of the assailants. Thereafter, the assailants fled away. Initially, a case under Sections 118(1), 126(2), 351(2), 191(3) and 190 of

( 2 ) BNS was registered. During the course of investigation, offence under Section 118(2) of BNS was added. Investigation is still underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana but the same had been dismissed, vide order dated 08.04.2025. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. There is delay of 23 days in reporting the matter to the police, which has not been explained at all and the same has rendered the entire story of the complainant to be highly doubtful. The injury that has been opined to be grievous in nature and sustained by the injured, has not been attributed to the petitioner but to other co-accused. Co-accused Mahinder Kumar has been extended benefit of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed in CRMM-44813-2025. On parity, the petitioner too deserves to be granted the same benefit. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be granted benefit of anticipatory bail. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and has not disputed the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that co-accused Mohinder Kumar has already been granted concession of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed in CRM-M-44813-2025 and case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of co-accused. 6.

Heard.

( 3 ) 7.

Keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel, that there is a delay of 23 days in lodging the FIR which remains unexplained by the prosecution; the petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common objection thereof, assaulted the complainant and his friend Gursewak Singh, however, the injuries attributed to the petitioner have not been opined to be grievous in nature; co-accused Mohinder Kumar has been extended the concession of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-44813-2025 vide order dated 13.10.2025, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.

The petitioner is granted concession of anticipatory bail, subject to the compliance of conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. He is directed to appear before the Investigating/Arresting Officer to join investigation within a period of two weeks from today or as and when subsequently required thereafter. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating/Arresting Officer shall release the petitioner on bail subject to his/her satisfaction. 8.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the case. ( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 13.03.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No