Gurpreet Singh v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-70260-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-70260-2025 (O&M) Decided on: 12.12.2025 GURPREET SINGH ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

Present:

Mr. Gurdarshan S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.

Ms. Suresha Rani, Advocate for the complainant. **** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.182 dated 07.08.2025 under Sections 115, 127(2), 3(5), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 (Section 109 of BNS, 2023 added later on) registered at Police Station Kalanwali, District Dabwali, Sirsa. 2.

Brief facts of the case are that complainant namely, Jagsir Singh stated that on 06.08.2025, at around 7:30 PM, while the complainant being at home and on hearing that his younger brother namely, Jagtar Singh (the victim) was talking loudly in the street, he went out and saw that co-accused namely, Romi, Rabi and Gurpreet (the present petitioner) were threatening his younger brother that he has stolen their phone. His brother denied the same and to assure them of the same, he offered to take an oath about this in Gurudwara. Upon this, the coaccused along with the present petitioner and the victim (i.e. brother of

CRM-M-70260-2025 -2the complainant) went to the Gurudwara and the complainant also followed them. As soon as they reached Gurudwara, co-accused-Ravi attacked the victim (Jagtar Singh) on his head with an axe. When the complainant tried to intervene, Gurpreet (the present petitioner) hit him repeatedly with iron pipe. Co-accused, Romi had a sword with him and when the complainant tried to snatch it, the said co-accused ran away with the sword. The victim (Jagtar Singh) fell on the ground. Due to his hue and cry, people gathered at the spot due to which, all the assailants ran away from the spot with their respective weapons while threatening to return their mobile else they would kill his brother. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had already joined the investigation in this case as initially the FIR was registered under Sections 115, 127(2), 3(5), 351(2) of BNS, 2023, however, later on, Section 109 of BNS was added to the said FIR. It is further contended that the petitioner is having clean antecedents and custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is not required as weapon possessed by the petitioner in the alleged offence has already been recovered from him. It is further contended that a compromise has already been effected between the parties.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On advance notice, Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and does not dispute the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and the weapon i.e. iron pipe used in the alleged offence has already been recovered from him.

CRM-M-70260-2025 -35.

Ms. Suresha Rani, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and admits the factum of compromise with the petitioner and states that she has no objection if the concession of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner. 6.

Heard.

7.

Keeping in view the contentions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and the weapon i.e. iron pipe used in the alleged offence has already been recovered from him; the petitioner is having clear antecedents and is not involved in any other case except the present case; the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to join the investigation as and when, required by the Investigating Officer 






    



 


  


  


  



 (SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 12.12.2025 Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO