Karan Alias Karanbir Singh v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 08.01.2025 Karan alias Karanbir Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Anoop Verma, Advocate (through V.C.) with Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Amandeep S. Samra, AAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 307, 191(3) and 190 of BNS, 2023 (Section 109 of BNS deleted later on vide GD No.21, dated 30.09.2024), in a case arising out of FIR No.74, dated 08.08.2024, registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar. 2.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the main offence i.e. Section 109 of BNS, 2023 (attempt to murder), has been deleted from the case. Therefore, petitioner is left with the role of causing simple injury with 'daatar' on the person of complainant - Karan Singh. He also submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and is ready to join investigation. Thus, his custodial interrogation would not serve any purpose. 3.

On the other hand, in compliance to the order dated 23.12.2024,

- 2 - passed by the coordinate Bench, learned State counsel, files a short reply by way of affidavit dated 07.01.2025, of Inderjit Singh, PPS, DSP, SubDivision Rajasansi, Amritsar (Rural), on behalf of the respondent - State. Same is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

4.

Learned State counsel confirms the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner qua his role. He also admits that except the present case, petitioner is not found involved in any other case. However, he opposes the prayer of grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.

I have considered the submissions addressed by counsel for the parties and also gone through the record available before the Court. 6.

I do find that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not going to serve any purpose, as the role attributed to the petitioner, is of causing simple injury with 'daatar'. He can be directed to join investigation and cooperation with the investigation agency/investigating officer, during the process of investigation.

Besides, I have also considered that the allegation of snatching of an amount of Rs.10,000/-, is also not against the petitioner. Resultantly, prayer made in the petition qua anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed. 7.

Consequently, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency by serving a notice in writing. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting

- 3 - Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

8.

Besides, petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the Country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court.

9.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Misc. application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE January 08, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No