High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32649/2025allowed

Surjit Chand Alias Dinu v. State Of Punjab

2025-07-21Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel3 pages

CRM-M No.32649 of 2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.32649 of 2025 Date of decision : 21.7.2025 Surjit Chand @ Dinu .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Gaurav Partap S. Pathania, Advocate, for the petitioner (through VC) Mr. Jasjeet Singh, DAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.93 dated 4.5.2025, under Sections 115(2), 303(2), 126(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 117(2) of BNS, 2023 added later on), registered at Police Station Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur.

On 26.6.2025, the following order was passed: 'CRM-24291-2025

1. For the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed. Copy of the MLR dated 03.05.2025 and the complaint/representation made to S.H.O., P.S. Dinanagar, are ordered to be taken on record respectively as Annexures A-1 and A-2, subject to all justexceptions. CRM-M-32649-2025

2. Through the instant petition, as instituted under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, the petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail, in

CRM-M No.32649 of 2025 -2FIR No.93 dated 04.05.2025, under Sections 115(2), 303(2), 126(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 (Section 117(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, added subsequently), registered at P.S. Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that, it is a case of version and cross-version, as the petitioner has also suffered injuries at the hands of the complainant in the present FIR. In this regard, he places reliance upon the MLR (Annexure A-1). He further submits that, as per the allegations, the petitioner was empty handed, therefore, the intention to cause grievous hurt was not there.

4. Notice of motion for 21.07.2025.

5. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, A.A.G., Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State of Punjab.

6. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and to appear before the investigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023.' 3.

Learned State counsel (on instructions from ASI Balkar Singh) submits that pursuant to the order dated 26.6.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation but his custodial interrogation is required to affect recovery of the articles allegedly taken away during the course of fight. 4.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court deems it appropriate to confirm the order dated 26.6.2025 and reject the prayer of the State of custodial interrogation, which is only being sought for recovery of some articles. This Court is inclined to pass this order especially in view of the fact that the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperate therein except recovery of the alleged articles as indicated hereinabove.

In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed. The interim

CRM-M No.32649 of 2025 -3order dated 26.6.2025, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS. 6.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 7.

Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 21.7.2025 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No