IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 23.02.2026 JAGMEET KUMAR ALIAS JAGGU ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. A.P.S. Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Yadwinder Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Rahul Vijay Singh Chugh, Advocate for Ms. Harpreet Kaur Arora, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.205 dated 29.07.2025 under Sections 75, 126 (2), 61 (2), 79 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67 (A) of Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, 2. The contents of FIR are reproduced hereinafter.

“The complainant, Karam Singh, stated that he married xxxxx alias xxxxxx in 2001 and they have two children, a son and a daughter. Their daughter is studying abroad and their son, Vasdeep, aged about 16, is studying in the eleventh grade. On the night of October 20, 2024, at about 11:00 PM, a man named Gurmeet Singh, who has a form-filling shop near the bus stand in Khai Pheme Ki, lured his wife xxxxx out. Gurmeet Singh dropped her off in the street at about 1:00 AM. At that time, an unidentified boy attempted to sexually assault his wife. A security guard named Jagmeet Jaggu, son of Bhagwan Das, a resident of Khai Pheme Ki, recorded a video of the incident on his mobile phone and sent it to Ravi Moga. Ravi Moga then wrote vulgar and abusive words on the video and made it viral in various groups. The petitioner found out about this through the groups and has attached screenshots. The complainant and his family, especially his young son Vasdeep, are suffering from great mental distress due to the viral video and the offensive comments, which have brought disrepute to their family and relatives in the community. The complainant requests legal action and justice.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the statement of the complainant, wherein it was alleged that while a person was sexually molesting his wife, the petitioner made video of the said incident and made it viral online. It is submitted that one Nachhatar Singh, who is also working as a security guard at the SBI Branch, Khai Pheme Ke, and to whom the petitioner is alleged to have forwarded the said video, has not been made an accused in the present FIR. Moreover, it has surfaced during investigation that in fact it was one Ravi Monga, who had circulated the alleged video on the social media, and also used foul language for the wife of the complainant. It is further submitted that the said main accused Ravi Monga has been arrested, and is in judicial custody. It is submitted that the petitioner is willing to join investigation and co-operate.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 have vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submit that there are specific and serious allegations against the petitioner. They state that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence.

5. Learned State counsel while placing reliance upon the status report dated 28.12.2025 submits that during the course of investigation, from the statements of witnesses, video recording contained in the pen drive, and the screenshots, it was found that on 20.10.2024, at about 1:00 a.m. the present petitioner upon finding the prosecutrix alone, stopped her on her way and tried to commit indecent and inappropriate acts with her and upon refusal, the petitioner used force. Thereafter, he recorded the video clip of the occurrence and sent the same to various individuals including co-accused Ravi Monga, who further circulated the said video in WhatsApp group by writing indecen