IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Prince ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Date of Decision: February 09, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 09, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

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.221 dated 04.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 331(6), 191(3) and 190 of the BNS Act, 2023, at Police Station Canal Colony Bathinda, District Bathinda.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the complainant, namely, Shubham Tiwari stated that he is employed with RBL Bank and works in the collection of installments. On 31.08.2025, his friends, namely Waris Aniket Sharma, son of Rohit Sharma, and Vanshish, son of Omkar, came to his house to meet him. At that time, he was having dinner at his house along with his friends and his father.

At about 9:00 PM, Karan, Sanjay, Vijay, and Ajay, all sons of Sh.

Raju, Prince (petitioner herein), son of Pinki, and Koki, son of Gullu, along with 5–6 unidentified persons, arrived in front of their house while armed with deadly weapons. As the gate of the house was open, they forcibly entered the premises and attacked the complainant, his father Babu Tiwari, and his friends with their respective weapons.

During the assault, Vijay struck the complainant twice on the back side of his head with a kirpan. Karan inflicted a blow with a khanda on the fingers of the complainant’s right hand. Ajay hit the complainant on his right arm with a hockey stick. Prince struck the complainant below the knee joint of his right leg with an iron rod. Sanjay delivered a blow with the reverse side of an axe on the complainant’s left arm. Koki also inflicted a blow with the reverse side of a gandasa on the fingers of the complainant’s right hand. As a result of the attack, the complainant fell to the ground, after which the unidentified persons assaulted him with kicks and fist blows. The accused persons also caused injuries to the complainant’s father and his friends. Upon the complainant raising an alarm, the accused persons fled from the spot with their respective weapons. Thereafter, the complainant, along with the other injured persons, namely Vanshish, Waris Aniket Sharma, and his father Babu Tiwari, was admitted to Civil Hospital, Bathinda for medical treatment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that a bare perusal of the FIR itself shows that allegations leveled against the petitioner are concocted, improbable and devoid of any merit. Learned counsel has further iterated that the incident, in respect of which the FIR in question was registered on 04.09.2025, allegedly has been shown to be happened on 31.08.2025, hence, there is an unexplained and inordinate delay while lodging the FIR in question, which casts serious dent on the veracity of the prosecution story. Learned counsel as further argued that assuming arguendo, the prosecution version is taken to be correct, injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature. Learned counsel has further iterated that the entire story of the prosecution is concocted & fabricated one with the motive to implicate the petitioner in the case in hand.

3.1. Learned counsel asserts that the police have not conducted a fair and impartial investigation and the inquiry conducted so far is not only incomplete, but also tainted with bias. Learned counsel has asserted that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Moreover, the custodial interrogation should not be used as a punitive measure and is justified only when absolutely necessary for the recovery of material evidence. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready to join the investigation a