Dalbir Singh Alias Dalveer Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-32887-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101+214 CRM-26449-2025 in/ and CRM-M-32887-2025 Date of decision : 14.07.2025 DALBIR SINGH ALIAS DALVEER SINGH ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. GREWAL
 Mr. K.S. Brar, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.

Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) CRM-26449-2025 Allowed as prayed for and Annexures P-4 & P-5 are taken on record.

Main case The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.41 dated 27.05.2025 under Sections 118, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (Section 118(2) of BNS, 2023 added later on) registered at Police Station Kotfatta, Bathinda.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has given injuries to the complainant. It is stated that he has caused grievous injury on the fore arm of the complainant. It is also stated that the motive also lies with the present petitioner among other co-accused.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not

CRM-M-32887-2025 (O&M) -2present at the spot and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case.

4.

Dr. R.P.S. Girwar, Advocate alongwith Mr. A.A.P. Rau, Advocate and Mr. K.T. Rau, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant by way of filing vakalatnama and opposes the grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the allegations made against the petitioner are grave in nature and prays for dismissal of the anticipatory bail. He further states that the grievous injury on the person of the complainant, cannot be self-inflicted and the present petitioner has been attributed with the role of causing grievous injury on the fore-arm of the complainant.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have considered the allegations against the petitioner. 7.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the allegations involved in the present case are serious in nature and as such, he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Therefore, no ground is made out to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. (H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE July 14, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No

CRM-M-32887-2025 (O&M) -3-