113 (1st case)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Mohammad Shoaib Rather ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab ….Respondent Date of decision: January 28, 2026 Date of Uploading: January 29, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. R.S. Cheema, Senior Advocate with Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate, Mr. Aakash Vashisth, Advocate and Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate (presence marked through video-conferencing) and Ms. Deepika Verma, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.70 dated 15.05.2025, under Sections 109, 103(1), 190, 191(3), 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Satnampura, Phagwara, District Kapurthala.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the injured, namely Ahmad Mohamed Nour Ahmed Hussen, stated that on 15.05.2025, he had gone to perform Namaz along with his friend Mohammad Wada Bala Yousif Ahmed (since deceased) and three girls, namely Ethar Youssry Salih Mohammed Ahmed, Narmeen Omer Abdalla Edris, and Fatimaelzahara Amir Tagelsir Mahgoub. When they reached just outside the said premises, they were accosted by six to seven unknown persons who were standing there. It is alleged that the assailants started inquiring about the phone numbers of the girls and, when the injured attempted to intervene and restrained them, the accused persons initiated a scuffle. All the accused, out of whom two were armed with knives, allegedly caught hold of the injured and his friend. The assailants thereafter stabbed both the injured and the deceased on the left side of their chests. Upon raising hue and cry, all the accused fled from the spot. Thereafter, Prabhat Dubey arrived at the scene and took both the injured persons to Johal Hospital, where Mohammad Wada Bala Yousif Ahmed was declared brought dead, while the injured was admitted to the hospital after having sustained serious and life-threatening injuries.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.05.2025 and has already undergone substantial incarceration. Learned Senior Counsel has further contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question and his involvement is not borne out from the material on record. Learned Senior Counsel has iterated that the Investigating Officer, after critically evaluating the material on record including CCTV footage/recordings, found the petitioner along with four other co-accused to be not culpable, and accordingly, an application dated 10.07.2025 seeking discharge of the petitioner and four other co-accused was moved before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phagwara. Learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that despite the opinion of the Investigating Agency itself, the learned JMIC, vide order dated 16.07.2025, dismissed the said discharge application and, inadvertently, held that a prima facie case was made out against the petitioner and the other four co-accused. Learned Senior Counsel has further argued that thereafter, vide order dated 07.08.2025, the learned JMIC again inadvertently proceeded to take cognizance against the petitioner and others by invoking the principle of vicarious/joint liability, even though the Court itself recorded a categorical observation that no specific injury or overt act was attributed to the petitioner or the said co- accused. Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that assuming arguendo, the prosecution version is assumed to be correct; the role attributed to the petitioner is confined merely to his presence at the spot with a brick in his hand, without any allegation of use thereof or causing injury to any person. Learned Senior Counsel has empha