IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
Gurcharan Singh And Others - Petitioners
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondents
CRM-M-33799-2025 (O&M), CRM-M-34461-2025 (O&M), CRM-M-39149-2025 (O&M)
Decided On : 09-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seeking anticipatory bail due to apprehension of arrest. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments concerning bail and threats to complainant. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. analysis of bail law and presumption of innocence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. conditional approval of bail based on specific terms. (Para 14 , 18) |
| 5. final order granting bail with specified conditions. (Para 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 44 | 01.06.2025 | Mulepur, District Fatehgarh Sahib | 329(3), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 191 and 190 BNS |
This order shall dispose of three petitions i.e. CRM-M-33799-2025, CRM-M- 34461-2025 and CRM-M-39149-2025, as the same have arisen out of common FIR and common prayer has been made in all the petitions. However, for brevity, facts are being taken from CRM-M-33799-2025.
1. The petitioners apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above have come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [ BNSS ], seeking anticipatory bail.
2. As per paragraph 14 of the petition(s), the petitioners have clean antecedents.
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from para 2 of the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:
“2. That the brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the statement of Nirmal Singh, who stated to the effect that,
(i) He is an agriculturist. They are two brothers. They have 15 acres of land. He and his brother Ranjit Singh had executed an agreement with Harpreet Singh on 15.04.2019 for 28 kanals of land. The opposite party did not get executed sale deed within the stipulated period and filed a court case against them. Thereafter, they entered into a compromise on 06.05.2023. He had issued a security cheque bearing no.069489 for Rs.18 lakhs in favour of Harpreet Singh.
(ii) On 21.07.2023, the complainant had paid the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs in cash in the presence of witness Beant Singh, son of Bachan Singh. Harpreet Singh had executed power of attorney in favour of Gurdeep Singh to file a court case against them. The agreement was got written by Ranjit Singh. The remaining amount of Rs.8 lakhs was to be paid to Harpreet Singh on 24.05.2025. Harpreet Singh refused to take the amount.
(iii) On 25.05.2025, at about 7:30 pm, he and his brother Ranjit Singh, sister-in-law Charanjit Kaur and his wife Harpreet Kaur were sowing the land near their motor. Then on the land on the other side, two tractors i.e. Sonalika and make Ford. Sonalika tractor was being driven by Gurcharan Singh (petitioner no.1) and Ford tractor was being driven by an unknown person. They started irrigating the land of the complainant forcibly.
(iv) The complainant further stated that he and his brother Harjit Singh, sister-in-law Charanjit Kaur and his wife Harpreet Kaur restrained their tractors but the said individuals threatened to irrigate their land. On questioning, Harjit Singh gave a kirpan blow on the right eye of the complainant. Blood started oozing out. The complainant raised alarm then his brother Ranjit Singh and sister- in-law Charanjit Kaur started rescuing him then Hardeep Singh (petitioner no.2), Gursewak Singh (petitioner no.3) gave blows with sticks to his brother Ranjit Singh and sister-in-law Charanjit Kaur, and gave leg blows to their stomachs. His sister-in-law fell unconscious. In the meantime, Gurcharan Singh (petitioner no.1) gave a blow with stick on the head of the complainant. When he tried to escape, Harjit Singh gave a blow with kirpan which hit his upper left arm. Blood started oozing out from his arm. Then, Jaswinder Singh (petitioner no.4), Anaib Singh (petitioner no.5), Hardeep Singh, Ajaib Singh, Gursewak Singh, Manpreet Singh, Swaran Singh, Sukhpreet Singh, Randhir Singh gave blows with soties to them. Harpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh (petitioner no.7) were armed with kirpans and they raised lalkara not to let them go on that day. They threatened to kill them. Manpreet Singh tri
Anticipatory bail should be granted when the allegations do not warrant custodial interrogation, especially in cases with simple injuries and clean antecedents.
The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing that pre-trial incarceration is not justified based on the nature of allegations and the need to balance the accused's liberty with a fair trial.
The court emphasized the requisite balance between personal liberty and the necessity of pre-trial detention, highlighting Article 21's protection against unjust deprivation of liberty.
Bail should be granted unless compelling reasons exist, balancing the accused's liberty with victim protection, especially when the accused is a first-time offender.
The court considered the nature of allegations, injuries inflicted, and other factors peculiar to the case, and imposed stringent conditions to ensure the safety of the witnesses and the victim.
Bail can be granted based on age, lack of antecedents, and significant time already served, ensuring conditions are set to prevent influence on witnesses.
Bail should be granted unless compelling reasons exist, with conditions ensuring compliance and victim protection.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.