IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Aniket ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab ….Respondent Date of Decision: February 10, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 10, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Arshdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.292 dated 27.10.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 115(2), 118(1), 191(3), 190 of the BNS, 2023 (Section 118(2) of BNS, 2023 added later on) [old Sections 323, 324, 148, 149 of IPC (Section 326 of IPC added later on)], registered at Police Station City South Moga.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that complainant, namely, Kash Mittal son of Satish Mittal, got recorded that he is running a commission agent shop bearing No.202 at Outer Grain Market, Moga. He stated that on 21.10.2025 at about 8:45 PM, he along with his friend Shubham Bansal son of Satish Kumar and his cousin Nitin Mittal son of Vinod Kumar Mittal, was bursting crackers in front of his house on account of the Diwali festival. At that time, Ram Prashad son of Bhagwan Dass, Narinder Kumar son of Ram Prashad, Rakesh Kumar, Aniket (petitioner herein) and Sahil son of Rajinder Kumar, came out of their house.

Ram Prashad raised a lalkara exhorting the others to catch hold of them and teach them a lesson for bursting crackers in front of their house. Thereafter, Sahil gave a fist blow to the complainant which hit the back of his neck. Rakesh Kumar also gave a fist blow which hit his forehead and thereafter pushed him forcefully, causing him to fall on the ground and sustain injuries on both elbows. Rakesh Kumar further gave a fist blow which struck his lips, while Sahil allegedly strangulated him by pressing his neck with a ‘safa’. In the meantime, Aniket (petitioner herein) inflicted a sword blow upon the complainant, which hit the little finger of his left hand when he raised his hand in self-defence. The complainant further stated that when his friend – Shubham Bansal came forward to rescue him, Narinder Kumar gave a baseball bat blow to Shubham which struck his neck, and Rakesh Kumar gave a fist blow which hit his nose. On raising alarm, the accused persons allegedly pushed the main gate of the complainant’s house. Meanwhile, Naman son of Parveen, reached the spot and arranged a private vehicle through which the injured were taken to Civil Hospital, Moga, from where they were discharged on 22.10.2025. The motive behind the occurrence was stated to be previous disputes and scuffles between the parties over parking of vehicles.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has argued that, in fact, it was the complainant-side, being aggressor, had attacked Ram Parsad as well as his family members and caused serious injuries, the statements of the petitioner-side were recorded by the police, but no action has been taken against the complainant-side. Learned counsel has argued that at the time of incident in question, the petitioner was not present at the spot, and the alleged injury attributed to the petitioner is a manufactured one having an outcome of blow with friendly hands, and even, no repeated blow has been attributed to the petitioner.

3.1. Learned counsel has argued that co-accused of the petitioner, namely Narinder Kumar, Sahil Kumar and Ram Prashad have been accorded concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide orders dated 19.12.2025 and

20.01.2026, respectively.

3.2. Learned counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation, and no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind