High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/50843/2025allowed

Satnam Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab

2026-01-14Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel3 pages

CRM-M No.50843 of 2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.50843 of 2025 Date of decision : 14.1.2026 Date of uploading : 15.1.2026 Satnam Singh and others .............Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. R.S. Bains, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amarjeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, AAG, Punjab Mr.Amitabh Tiwari, Advocate, for the complainant --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

On 11.9.2025, the following order was passed: 'Apprehending their arrest in FIR No.104 dated 01.07.2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 191(3) & 190 of the BNS, 2023 (Section 333 and 118(2) of BNS added later on vide G.D. No.14 dated 12.07.2025), at Police Station Samana, Patiala, District Patiala; the petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking prearrest bail. 2 Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for sometime, seeks permission to withdraw the petition in hand qua petitioner No.2, namely, Makhan Singh.

3. Ordered accordingly.

4. As regards remaining petitioners, i.e., petitioner No.1, namely, Satnam Singh, petitioner No.3, namely Gurdhian Singh and petitioner No.4, namely, Jugraj Singh, it has been argued by learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that role attributed to these petitioners is that of simple injury, the petitioners have been falsely implicated into the FIR in question on

CRM-M No.50843 of 2025 -2account of impending rivalry, the case in hand is one of version and crossversion, & the /petitioners are willing to join investigation and cooperate therein.

5. Notice of motion.

6. On the strength of advance service of copy of petition, Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, AAG Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent State of Punjab.

7. Mr. Amitabh Tewari, Advocate appears and files his vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record.

8. Put up on 14.10.2025.

9. Petitioner No.1, namely, Satnam Singh, petitioner No.3, namely Gurdhian Singh and petitioner No.4, namely, Jugraj Singh are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.09.2025 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join investigation. In the event of arrest, they shall be released on interim bail subject to their furnishing personal/ surety bond(s) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/ Investigating Officer. As and when further called by Investigating Officer, they shall join the investigation. They shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.' 2.

Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 11.9.2025, the petitioners have joined investigation and are no longer required for custodial interrogation. 3.

Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail to the petitioners on the ground that there are direct and serious allegations against the petitioners. Learned counsel has, however, iterated that in case the petitioners are granted the concession of anticipatory bail, there is all the likelihood that they may abscond from the process of justice and interfere the prosecution witnesses. 4.

Keeping in the entirety of the facts and circumstance of the case, especially the stand of the State that the petitioners have joined investigation and their custodial interrogation is not required, this Court is

CRM-M No.50843 of 2025 -3inclined to confirm the order dated 11.9.2025. 5.

Ordered accordingly.

The petition is allowed.

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. 8.

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 14.1.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No