237 (2 cases)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.40266 of 2025 Shahbaz Singh @ Sodhi .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CRM-M No.41656 of 2025 Gursharan Singh ….. Petitioner versus State of Punjab ….. Respondent Date of decision: 09.09.2025 CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present :- Mr. R. S. Bains, Senior Advocate with Mr. Inderpal Singh Deol, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions.

Ms. Simran Goria, Asstt. A.G., Punjab assisted by ASI Anil Kumar.

Mr. Tarurag Gaur, Advocate for the complainant.

****

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. By this order, I dispose of the above mentioned two petitions arising out of the same FIR.

2. Both the petitions have been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case bearing FIR No.103, dated 03.06.2025, under Sections 109, 118(1), 118(2), 115(2), 190, 191(3), 351(2) of BNS, registered at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

3. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Balwinder Singh. It was alleged that on 01.06.2025, the complainant and his brother, namely, Surjit Singh had gone to their fields for water at around 8:00 A.M. On reaching there, Sukhwinder Sigh armed with Kirpan, Gurmukh Singh armed with Khanda, Sajjan Singh empty handed along with 6-7 unknown persons, who were armed with sticks and baseball bats arrived there. Sajjan Singh exhorted his accomplices to teach them a lesson and then, on his exhortion, Sukhwinder Singh, Gurmukh Singh and others started beating them with their respective weapons. The unknown persons also attacked with their respective weapons. Both the complainant and his brother were shifted to the Hospital. Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the culprits. However on the statement, the FIR for the offence under Section 109 BNS was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. However, during the investigation, the offence under Section 109 BNS has been deleted. During the investigation, the supplementary statement was recorded and thus, both the petitioners were also arrayed as an accused in the present case on 13.06.2025. Resultantly, both the petitioners were arrested on the same day, i.e. 13.06.2025. Both the petitioners approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur praying for the grant of bail, however after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur declined the bail applications filed by both the petitioners vide order dated 17.07.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court by way of filing the present petitions praying for the grant of regular bail.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that neither the petitioners are named in the FIR, nor there is any specific role attributed to them. He has submitted that the allegations made in the FIR were to the extent that 6-7 unknown persons were their along with the co-accused. He has submitted that in a premeditated manner, on the basis of supplementary statement recorded 10 days after the occurrence, the petitioners have been implicated in the present case. To buttress his arguments, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that even during the investigation, the offence under Section 109 BS has not been substantiated and thus the investigating agencies have deleted the same. He has submitted that even on the basis of the allegations made, the injuries, which are declared to be grievous, have been attributed to the co-accused and none of the injuries, as alleged against the petitioner, has been found to be grievous. He has submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and the investigation of the case already stands completed. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, both the petitioners deserve