IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sushil Machan ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent Date of decision: 02.12.2025 Date of Uploading: 02.12.2025 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Nikhil Thamman, Advocate and Ms. Sunaina, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.270 dated 21.10.2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 304, 196, 352, 353(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Section 67 of I.T. Act, 2000 at Police Station Division No.7, District Ludhiana.

2. The gravamen of the FIR pertains to using of abusive words and insulting the Purvanchal community. It was alleged by the complainant Braj Bhushan Singh that he belongs to the Purvanchal community. The petitioner Sushil Machan, is a journalist. According to the complainant, the co-accused Sandeep Singh Attal @ Sandvi and the petitioner Sushil Machan regularly insult the Purvanchal community. He further alleged that petitioner Sushil Machan abuses, threatens, intimidates and blackmails poor road vendors. The accused also deliver provocative and hateful speeches against the Hindu-Sikh communities to create social disharmony. It has been further alleged that the both the aforesaid accused make derogatory remarks about the women of the Purvanchal community which has caused great anger among its members. Both the accused were blackmailers who extort money from the migrant workers by threatening them. The complaint was supported by a memorandum signed by several other members of the Purvanchal community. The matter was forwarded to the ADCP for investigation. During the course of inquiry, the complainant submitted a pen drive. It was found that the petitioner Sushil Machan had intentionally interviewed co-accused Sandeep Singh alias Sandvi, who made provocative statements by claiming that migrants from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar bring large quantities of ganja to Punjab and sell it in Ludhiana. Furthermore, the women of the Purvanchal community are involved in flesh trade and that migrants are now ruling Punjab. On these set of allegations, the instant FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the present FIR is nothing but a counterblast to the FIR lodged from the petitioner’s side against one Vishal, arising out of a dispute between members of the Punjabi and Purvanchal communities outside the police station. Learned counsel has further iterated that the present case is a case of version and cross-version as the incident arose out of a verbal altercation between the members of the Punjabi and Purvanchal communities outside the police station resulting in FIRs being lodged by both the sides. Learned counsel has further submitted that no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner and his name has been introduced later only through a supplementary statement. Learned counsel has further iterated that the allegations against the petitioner are vague, baseless and appear to be motivated by malice. Learned counsel has further submitted that despite there being no direct or indirect involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence, he has been roped into the present case without any credible evidence. Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no need for custodial interrogation of the petitioner as nothing incriminating remains to be recovered from him. Moreover, there is no likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is enlarged on pre-arrest bail. On strength of these submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence c