SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 17947

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NARINDER KUMAR AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 14.10.2025 Narinder Kumar and another ....Petitioners V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Jasbir Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Madan Lal Saini, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

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 petitioners in case bearing FIR No.133 dated 23.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 115(2), 333, 351(1), 351(3), 324(4), 324(5) of BNS 2023, at Police Station Kathgarh, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question reflects that the FIR was registered on the basis of a statement made by Ram Kumar, son of Mohan Lal, resident of Village Natha Nangal, Police Station Kathgarh, District SBS Nagar, who is employed as a primary school teacher. According to him, on 22.09.2025 at around 2:15 PM, while he was present at his residence along with his family, accused Narinder Kumar (son of Dev Raj) and Kamal Kumar (son of Thakur Das), both residents of the same village, were found standing outside his house, hurling abuses and threatening him that they would not allow him to reside there. It was further alleged that, in pursuance of a common plan and in conspiracy with Narinder Kumar, accused Sunny Deol (son of Kamal Kumar) and Santokh Singh Soni (son of Gian Singh) forcibly entered in the house of the complainant, armed with swords (kirpans), and launched an assault on the complainant and his family. The co-accused of the present petitioners namely Santokh Singh is stated to have inflicted a kirpan blow on the complainant’s right thumb, while another co- accused Sunny Deol allegedly struck the complainant’s 8-year-old son, Armandeep Singh, on the head with a kirpan. In the course of the attack, the accused also damaged the CCTV cameras installed at the complainant's residence and destroyed his vehicle. It is further alleged that Asha (wife of Narinder Kumar), Pooja (wife of Sunny Deol), and Raj Kumar (son of Niranjan Kumar) joined the other accused in the street and pelted stones and bricks at the complainant’s house, resulting in damage to the main gate and issuing threats to kill the family. One Mohan Lal is also stated to have sustained injuries due to the brick pelting. Thereafter, all the accused persons allegedly fled from the scene with their weapons. The complainant and his family were subsequently taken to Civil Hospital, Balachaur, where their medico-legal reports (MLRs) were prepared, reflecting the injuries sustained during the incident upon the person of Ram Kumar, Amandeep Singh and Mohan Lal. On these set of allegations, instant FIR under Sections 61(2), 115(2), 333, 351(1), 351(3), 324(4), 324(5) of BNS 2023, was registered against the petitioners and other co-accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case owing to a long-standing neighbourhood dispute with the complainant’s family. It is further contended that the allegations levelled in the FIR are highly exaggerated and stem from personal enmity. There is no independent witness to corroborate the prosecution version. Learned counsel has further submitted that no specific injury has been attributed to the present petitioners and the medical reports (MLRs) reflect only simple and blunt injuries, which do not fall within the ambit of ‘grievous hurt’. It has further been argued that though the complainant has alleged use of swords (kirpans) but no such weapon has been recovered to substantiate his claim. It is, accordingly, submitted that the entire case rests merely on a general statement of the complainant and there is no reliable or concrete ev

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top