SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present second petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.78 dated 28.05.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115, 118(1), 126, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(3), 118(2) of BNS at Police Station Rori, District Sirsa.

The petitioner had earlier applied for grant of regular bail before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn on 15.10.2025. The relevant part of said order reads as under:-

“2. Faced with the situation that injured witness, namely, Satnam Singh is yet to be examined as prosecution witness, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petitioner in hand at this stage.

3. Ordered accordingly.

4. The trial Court is directed to make an earnest endeavour to record testimony of the said witness-injured, namely, Satnam Singh.

5. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.”

2. The gravamen of the FIR reflects that the complainant namely Satnam Singh son of Gurtej Singh @ Teja Singh, resident of village Rodi, has alleged that on 26.05.2025 at about 9:00 PM to 9:30 PM, he alongwith his friend Harpal Singh was going towards the house of the latter. When they reached near the Scheduled Caste Chaupal in village Rodi, they found the Harbans Singh @ Kaka Singh @ Pandi standing there alongwith co-accused Manjeet Singh @ Kana, Ranjeet Singh @ Mani, Kuljeet Singh, Arshdeep Singh @ Arsi, Jashandeep Singh alias Bans (petitioner herein) and Gurdeep Singh @ Gauri. It has been further alleged that all the accused persons were armed with deadly weapons. Accused i.e. Manjeet Singh was allegedly carrying a sword, Ranjeet Singh an iron rod, Harbans Singh @ Kaka Singh a Kasiya, Kuljeet Singh a kirpan, Arshdeep Singh a knife, present petition an iron rod whereas accused Gurdeep Singh was empty handed. As per the complainant, the co-accused Harbans Singh raised an exhortation stating that complainant - Satnam Singh had arrived and he should not be spared. Immediately thereafter, all the co-accused persons had attacked the complainant with their respective weapons. The complainant has alleged that accused Manjeet Singh had attacked him with a sword aiming at his head which landed on his right wrist when he attempted to save himself. Similarly, accused Ranjeet Singh allegedly attacked him with an iron rod and accused Kuljeet Singh assaulted him with a sharp-edged weapon causing injuries on his hands and arms. The complainant has further alleged that when he attempted to flee from the spot, accused - Gurdeep Singh blocked his path and the accused Harbans Singh inflicted a Kasiya blow on his left shoulder. The specific allegation against the present petitioner is that he attacked the complainant with an iron rod blow which landed on the thick muscle of the left hand of the complainant. The complainant in an attempt to save himself, ran into the grocery shop and house of one Mange Ram but the accused persons followed him there while armed with the weapons. Thereafter, the accused persons continued to assault the complainant and threatened to kill him before fleeing from the spot. The injured was, thereafter, admitted in Sanjivani Hospital, Sirsa for treatment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question on account of some misunderstanding. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with the alleged occurrence and has been unnecessarily roped in merely on the basis of omnibus allegations. It has been further contended that even as per the allegations contained in the FIR, the role attributed to the petitioner is limited in nature and no injury on any vital part of the body has been attributed to him. It has been further argued that the specific allegation against the petitioner is only that he inflicted an iron rod blow on the thick muscle of the left hand o