IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 23.09.2025 Gurtej Singh alias China ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Jupinder Pal Singh Brar, Advocate for the petitioner (thorough VC).

Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.10 dated 23.02.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS Act, at Police Station Sangat, District Bathinda.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that the criminal proceedings were initiated on the statement of the complainant namely Gurdeep Singh, aged 45 years, who alleged that on 22.02.2025, the Gurtej Singhalias China (petitioner herein) alongith his co-accused namely Sukhjeet Singh @ Gaggi and Manpreet Singh @ Gurpiyas Singh armed with deadly weapons attacked him and his family members outside their house. The complainant alleged that the petitioner armed with a sword gave a blow on the back side of his head which was later declared grievous in nature. It was further alleged that the minor son of the complainant namely Jashandeep Singh sustained injuries declared dangerous to life while his wife, mother and sister-in-law also suffered multiple injuries. On raising hue and cry, all the accused fled from the spot on their motorcycles. The injured were admitted to Sharda Hospital, Bathinda for the treatment. The reasons of the enmity as per the complainant is that three boys under the influence of intoxication had fallen into the sewer in front of the house of the complainant and when the complainant and his family members tried to save them, they starting assaulting them. On these set of allegations, instant FIR was registered against the accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question in order to pressurize him to compromise an earlier case registered at the instance of the petitioner against the relatives of the complainant. It is argued that in that case, the petitioner himself sustained severe injuries and had rods implanted in both arms and legs leaving him incapable of free movement. Learned counsel has further iterated that it is highly improbable that the petitioner, who was advised bed rest by the doctors two days prior to the alleged occurrence, could have actively participated in the alleged attack. Furthermore, the medical opinion dated 08.04.2025 shows that most of the injuries sustained by the complainant party were simple in nature. Learned counsel has further submitted that nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner and thus, his custodial interrogation is neither warranted nor justified. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and hence no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, the grant of instant petition is entreated for.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. Referring to the status report dated 22.09.2025, filed today by way of affidavit of Harjit Singh Mann, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rural Bathinda, learned State counsel has submitted that the role attributed to the petitioner is specific that he inflicted a sword blow on the head of the complainant which was declared grievous in nature, relevant whereof reads as under:

“6. That on 28.02.2025, the accused Sukhjit Singh @ Gaggi was arrested by the police. On the basis of the disclosure statement u/s 23 (2) BSA of the accused Sukhjit Singh @ Gaggi, the case property Kirpan used by him during occurrence, w