Yudhveer Singh Alias Judhu v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 05.06.2026 YUDHVEER SINGH ALIAS JUDHU .....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:

Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s) Mr. Rajiv Verma, Addl. A.G, Punjab.

*** SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1.

Prayer The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 (438 Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.54 dated 03-04-2026 under Section 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS Section 323/324/34 IPC Police Station Bhagta Bhai ka District, Bathinda. Contention On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an unexplained delay of four days in the registration of the FIR. It has further been contended that no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner except the offence punishable

under Section 323 IPC since as per the allegations, the petitioner has inflicted a dang blow on the right shoulder of injured Happy Singh. Notice of motion.

On behalf of the State On the asking of Court, Mr. Rajiv Verma, Addl. A.G, Punjab., accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State. He is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Analysis Without commenting upon the merits of the case and keeping in view the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the petitioner, the fact that the injury allegedly caused by the petitioner is stated to have been inflicted on the right shoulder and not on any vital part of the body, as well as the settled principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has succeeded in making out a case for the grant of anticipatory bail. In the light of above, this Court is of the considered view that there is no valid or cogent reason to deny the bail to the present petitioner, wherein he has bona fide intentions and is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency in time.

4.

Relief:- Hence, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation with the Investigating Officer concerned within a period of 10 days from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, which are reproduced below:-

'When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under subsection (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including- (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.' However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner does not comply with the aforesaid direction of joining the investigation within a period of ten days, the order passed by this Court today shall automatically stands cancelled. In the aforesaid terms, the present petition stands allowed. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 05.06.2026 JUDGE anuradha Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No