IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:24.09.2025 PARVEEN SINGH .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.

Present: Mr. Navjit Singh, Advocate and Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurav Verma, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab.

****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ , J.(Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.127 dated 02.08.2025 under Sections 118(2), 115(2), 333, 351(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 326, 323, 452, 506, 148 and 149 IPC), registered at Police Station Sadar Nabha, District Patiala.

2. The present First Information Report was registered on the statement of the injured-complainant, Daljeet Kaur, wife of Raj Singh. The complainant stated that she is a resident of Village Ichhewal, Police Station Sadar Nabha, District Patiala, and earns her livelihood as a labourer. She has three children, namely, Manpreet Kaur (married), Sandeep Singh aged about 24 years, and Sukhdevi Kaur aged about 22 years. On 28.07.2025, at about 7:40 p.m., when the complainant, her husband, and two younger children were preparing to sleep, someone knocked at their door. Her son Sandeep Singh opened the door, whereupon Parveen Singh (petitioner), son of Dharam Singh, armed with a kirch; Gobind Singh, son of Hazari Singh, armed with an iron rod; Jass Singh, son of Gobind Singh, armed with a stick; along with 3-4 unidentified persons also armed with sticks, entered the courtyard. As soon as Sandeep Singh stepped outside, Parveen Singh attacked him with the kirch, aiming at his head. Sandeep Singh raised his left hand to protect himself, as a result of which the blow struck his fingers. Thereafter, Jass Singh assaulted him with a stick. On hearing the commotion, the complainant and her daughter, Sukhdevi, came out of the house. At that moment, Parveen Singh struck the complainant with the kirch, aiming towards her left armpit. Though she moved aside, the blow landed beneath her left shoulder and penetrated into her chest. A second kirch blow was inflicted on her left upper arm, and she was also struck on the forehead with a fist. Parveen Singh then turned towards Sukhdevi, assaulted her, and scratched her body with his nails. The complainant’s shirt was torn in the course of the assault and became soaked in blood. Jass Singh further attacked both the complainant and her daughter with the stick, while the unidentified assailants mercilessly beat all three victims. Hearing the commotion, several neighbours gathered at the spot and intervened, thereby rescuing the complainant and her children from the assailants. It is further alleged that the petitioner and Jass Singh were heard proclaiming that the injuries sustained by the petitioner during his visit to Mata Naina Devi had been caused by Sandeep Singh, and that they would falsely implicate Sandeep Singh and his family members in retaliation.

3. Thereafter, the neighbours brought the complainant and her children to the Civil Hospital, Nabha, where they were medically examined and treated. The complainant, in the presence of her children, recorded her statement in the hospital, praying for legal action to be initiated against the accused persons.

4. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not a previous accused and has been falsely implicated in the above case. He claims that injuries are simple in nature. He submitted that there are contradictory statements of the complainant which render her presence as eye-witness doubtful. The co-accused Jashanpreet had been granted concession of anticipatory bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala.

5. Counsel for the State however submits that the case of the petitioner is not similar to that of the co-accused. He submits that the kirch blow on Sandeep Singh is attributed to him. Besides,