IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-24151-2026 Date of decision: 20.05.2026 LOVEPREET SINGH ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Pankaj Kalia, Advocate for the complainant.

..…

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.0015 dated 09.02.2026 registered under Sections 109, 333, 191(3), 190 of BNS, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Sarai Amant Khan, District Tarn Taran.

2. Brief facts of the present case are that, the petitioner who after having an altercation with the complainant, called the co-accused persons to the spot, facilitated their unlawful assembly and entered into the house of the complainant and fired with deadly weapons with an intention to kill and caused injuries to the complainant and his minor child. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that no overt act has been attributed to the petitioner except that he hurled abuses. He further submits that the petitioner was not armed with any weapon and therefore no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner. He submits that there is a delay of one day in registration of the FIR, thereby casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He further submits that the complainant and the petitioner are relatives and the dispute between the parties is trivial in nature. He submits that except one injury all other injuries attributed to the petitioner have been declared simple in nature. However, he submits that the complainant has himself admitted in his statement that the petitioner was unarmed. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. After registration of the FIR, investigation has been initiated and is under way. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran vide order dated

17.04.2026.

5. Learned State counsel has filed the status report, who, relying upon the same, has vehemently opposed the petitioner’s prayer for bail. It is submitted that the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. The learned counsel further contends that the petitioner in collusion with his armed associates entered into the house of the complainant and opened fired upon the complainant and his minor child. She further submits that as per the MLR, one injury inflicted on the complainant has been declared grievous in nature. She further submits that the injury suffered by the minor child, aged about 8 years, has also been declared grievous in nature, due to which the child has suffered loss of vision in his right eye. She further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential for effective investigation in the matter. On these grounds, the learned State counsel has prayed for dismissal of the present petition.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant adopts the submission made by learned State counsel. He submits that the petitioner has actively participated in the offence and prays that the instant petition be dismissed.

7. Heard.

8. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. The petitioner, along with his armed associates, allegedly