IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

211 CRM-M-3154-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.02.2026 Harpreet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. B. S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 253 dated 24.09.2025, registered under Sections 333, 331(6), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 191(3), 190 and 324(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Dharmkot, District Moga.

2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement recorded by complainant Surjit Singh on 24.09.2025 alleging that on 03.09.2025, he had gone to attend a marriage function in the house of his friend Harpreet Singh, i.e. the petitioner. While attending the function, a scuffle had taken place between him and the petitioner. He had returned to his house. Some time thereafter, the petitioner, being armed with Khanda and accompanied by co-accused, had reached outside his house on some vehicles and after making exhortations, entered therein while hurling abuses. He opened an assault upon the complainant by striking blow with Khanda on his person. His brother Balkar Singh also sustained injuries at the hands of the petitioner. His accomplices voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries to other members of his family and himself and vandalized his house. On clamour being raised, they had fled away. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, vide order dated 27.11.2025.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The injury allegedly sustained by the complainant at his hand has been opined to be simple in nature. There is inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR, which has not been explained. In fact, some other persons had assaulted the complainant at his own house and he was under impression that the guests, who had visited his house on the fateful day, had done so. The complainant had lodged this FIR after making manipulations and due deliberations. The version in the FIR is not believable at all. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be granted concession of anticipatory bail.

4. Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has argued that the petitioner along with the co-accused had voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries on the person of not only the complainant but his brother Balkar Singh as well. The injury sustained by victim Balkar Singh on his head has been opined to be grievous in nature and has been attributed to none else but the petitioner only. The delay in lodging of the FIR occurred due to the reason that the petitioner had indulged the complainant entering into a compromise and not for any other reason. For conducting thorough investigation in the matter, his custodial interrogation is must. It is, thus, argued that the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. This Court has heard the rival submissions.

6. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and to have forcibly entered into the complainant’s house, armed with a khanda, after a scuffle at a marriage function. He is further alleged to have assaulted the complainant and his brother, thereby causing simple as well as grievous injuries to them, besides injuring other family membe