A second anticipatory bail petition requires substantial change in circumstances from the previous rejection, and mere hostility of a witness does not suffice for bail in serious homicide cases.

JUDGMENT :

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. The present petition is the second attempt under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNS S ’) for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.99 dated 21.08.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103 , 191(3), 190 of , 2023 and Section 25 of the Arms Act and Section 238 of the , 2023 (added later on) at Police Station Sadar Nakodar, District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that the criminal proceedings were initiated based on a complaint filed by Charan Dass, who alleged that a few days prior to the incident, the petitioner Tirath Singh, alongwith 5/6 individuals, came to the residence of the complainant, used abusive language and threatened his son namely Kulwinder Singh @ Kindi. It was further alleged that a complaint in this regard was lodged at Police Post Kala Sanghia, but no action was taken. Furthermore, on the alleged day of occurrence i.e. 20.08.2024, at about 08:00-08:30 PM, son of the complainant namely Kulwinder Singh received a phone call from one Laddu and she immediately left the house on a motorcycle. The complainant and his other son namely Kuldeep Sing @ Babbyu, followed him. Thereafter, near the outskirts of village Uggi, they saw one Laddu talking to two individuals. At that time, a swift car (PB09-Z-6782) arrived, driven by co-accused Gurdit Singh @ Guri with Jatinder Singh @ Kohli in the front seat and the Tirath Singh (petitioner herein) Sukhwinder Singh @ Commando and Gurpreet Singh @ Datt seated in the rear. They alighted from the car and Tirath Singh (petitioner herein) alongwith co-accused Jatinder Singh allegedly began abusing the son of the complainant namely Kulwinder Singh, while holding datars in their hands. As the son of the complainant attempted to flee, accused Sukhwinder Singh allegedly fired a gunshot which hit his left thigh. The assailants then fled from the spot. Thereafter, son of the complainant namely Kulwinder Singh later succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. On these set of allegations, instant FIR ibid was registered against the accused. Following investigation, the final report has been submitted before the competent Court of jurisdiction.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that there has been a material change in the circumstances since the dismissal of the earlier bail petition on 07.08.2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the complainant, who initially supported the case of the prosecution, has now resiled from his earlier version and has not supported the case of the prosecution before the Court below, as evidenced from his statement annexed as Annexure P-4 with the instant petition. Learned counsel has further contended that the petitioner was neither present at the spot at the time of occurrence nor was he in the company of the principal accused. Furthermore, no specific overt act or injury has been attributed to the petitioner nor is there any recovery to be effected at his instance. Learned counsel has further submitted that the deceased was already facing litigation with the main accused, whereas the petitioner has no enmity or criminal antecedents and has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel has further iterated that the impugned FIR contains general and vague allegations of assault by all the accused persons using blunt weapons. It is further contended that, as per the post-mortem report, only a single gunshot injury was found on the deceased which has been specific