Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AVTAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023, seeking to set aside the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 by the Sessions Judge, SBS Nagar (!) .
The grounds for the petition include alleged failure of the Court below to consider the seriousness of the allegations, particularly the suicide note which is claimed to be a dying declaration attributing acts of harassment, illegal demands, and mental cruelty to respondent No.2 and her family (!) .
The petitioner contends that the investigating agency may have acted in a biased manner by withholding the suicide note from forensic examination, which could weaken the prosecution's case and suggest possible influence over the investigation by respondent No.2, who is a citizen of the USA and poses a flight risk (!) .
The petitioner emphasizes the gravity of the offence, which involves abetment to suicide, and argues that the order granting anticipatory bail was passed mechanically without proper application of mind (!) .
The respondent No.2's counsel defends the order, asserting that the order was well reasoned, and that respondent No.2 has cooperated with the investigation, with no evidence of misuse of liberty or attempts to influence witnesses (!) .
The investigation has been progressing lawfully, with the suicide note being sent for forensic examination, and the statement of the deceased indicating harassment by respondent No.2 and her co-accused (!) (!) (!) .
The Court notes that the petition primarily seeks to cancel the anticipatory bail based on allegations of serious misconduct and the gravity of the offence, but finds no concrete or supervening circumstances that justify such cancellation (!) .
The Court emphasizes that the considerations for grant and cancellation of bail are distinct; cancellation requires evidence of misuse or supervening circumstances, which are absent here (!) (!) .
The Court concludes that the order granting anticipatory bail was well reasoned and that no new or supervening material has been presented to warrant its cancellation (!) (!) .
Accordingly, the petition to set aside the anticipatory bail is dismissed, reaffirming the importance of judicial discretion and the need for concrete grounds in such applications (!) .
The Court clarifies that its observations do not express an opinion on the merits of the case itself and disposes of any pending applications (!) .
Please let me know if you need further assistance or analysis.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Avtar Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab and another ....Respondents Date of decision: 23.01.2026 Date of Uploading : 23.01.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.
Mr. Onkar Singh Batalvi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483(3) of the BNSS, 2023 read with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking setting-aside of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 vide order dated 06.06.2025 (Annexure P-4) passed by Sessions Judge, SBS Nagar in FIR No.59 dated 19.03.2025 registered for offences punishable under Section 108 of BNS at Police Station City Nawanshahr.
2. The relevant portion of the order passed by Sessions Judge, Mohali, reads as under:
“In view of the statement of HC Ravi Kumar, interim order dated
29.05.2025 is hereby made absolute. Applicant-accused, namely, Paramjit Kaur shall abide by conditions incorporated in Section 482(2) BNSS. The bail application stands disposed of. Papers be consigned to the Record Room.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Court below has failed to appreciate the seriousness and gravity of the allegations while passing the impugned order. Learned counsel has further iterated that the Court below has gravely erred in granting anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 without adverting to the suicide note, which according to the petitioner, constitutes a dying declaration of the deceased. Learned counsel has further submitted that the suicide note specifically attributes acts of harassment, illegal demands and mental cruelty to respondent No.2 and her family members. According to learned counsel, the investigating agency has acted in a biased manner by deliberately withholding the suicide note from forensic examination which weakened the prosecution case and extending undue benefit to the accused-respondent No.2. Furthermore, such conduct itself demonstrates that the accused-respondent No.2 has influenced the investigation and therefore does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel has pointed out that respondent No.2, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, is a citizen of USA poses a serious flight risk and her liberty is likely to prejudice the investigation as well as the trial which facts have completely been ignored by the Court below while granting the concession of anticipatory bail to the respondent No.2. Learned counsel has emphasized that the abetment of suicide is a heinous offence involving loss of human life and requires a strict approach. It has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed in a mechanical manner without application of mind. Thus, keeping in view the gravity of offence, cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated for.
4. Learned State counsel has filed short reply dated 12.01.2026 by way of an affidavit of Raj Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar and has raised submissions in tandem with the said status report; relevant whereof reads as under:
“9. That it is further submitted that during the course of investigation of this case, on 04.06.2025, the respondent No.2- Paramjit Kaur joined the investigation of this case in compliance of the order dated 29.05.2025, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, in bail application No. BA/651/2025, she was formally arrested in this case and released on bail in compliance of the said order dated 29.05.2025. During her interrogation, she produced photocopies of some documents, which were taken into police possession vide separate memo. The said order dated 29.05.2025 was subsequently, confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, SBS Nagar vide its order dated 06.06.2025.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
11. That it is further submitted that on 17.07.2025, one parcel cont
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
