Giani v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-35137-2025 108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35137-2025 Date of Decision: 08.07.2025 Jagmeet Singh @ Giani ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration. 8. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations, no objection by the complainant and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 9. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage. 10. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Jyoti Sharma 2025.07.16 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-35137-2025 Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 11. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 12. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 13. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 14. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 15. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 16. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
Arguments
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Prince Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Navreet K. Barnala, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Ravinder Singh, Advocate for the complainant. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 0053 10.05.2025 Jaito, Faridkot District 304(2), 126(2), 3(5) of BNS 1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. In paragraph 13 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the translated version of FIR, which reads as follows: “Statement of Ranjit Singh alias Neetu son of Harnek Singh, Numberdar, resident of Rasal Patti, Jaito, age about 45 years, mobile no. 91152-31631. Stated that I am resident of aforesaid address and agriculturist by profession. I am married, having one son and one daughter. On dated 25.4.2025, I went to the house of one of my friend namely, Harpiar Singh son of Pal Singh, resident of Ukandwala in order to see him. After seeing him and taking Harpiar Singh along on my motor cycle no. PB-62-7138 marka CD- 100 Bajaj, being driven by myself while my friend Harpiar Singh was sitting on its pillion, then, on dated 25.4.25 at about 05:00 PM, when we reached near flour mill from the side of phirni of village, then, inhabitants of village Ukandlana, namely, Jagsir Singh alias Seera; Jagmeet Singh alias Giani sons of Amarjit Singh and Manpreet Singh alias Kali son of Manjit Singh, residents of Ukandwala, all these three persons rounded our motor cycle and started hurling abuses to us. When we asked them about hurling of 1 Jyoti Sharma 2025.07.16 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh CRM-M-35137-2025 abuses to them, then, all these three persons being anguished and started making manhandling with us. At that time cash amount of Rs. 16700/- was lying on left pocket of the shirt worn by me along with one mobile phone marka touch OPPO containing sim card of Airtel company bearing no. 94783-31631, which were snatched by all the aforesaid three persons. Appropriate legal action against the aforesaid persons, namely, Jagsir Singh alias Seera; Jagmeet Singh alias Giani sons of Amarjit Singh and Manpreet Singh alias Kali son of Manjit Singh, residents of Ukandwala may be initiated. Till today, talk between us for compromise on panchayat level was going on, but, that could not be finalized. Today, I along with aforesaid Harpiar Singh was coming to police station for reporting the matter, however, you met us on Bajakhana chowk square, Dabrikhana near pond, Jaito and statement has been got recorded with you. Action may be initiated. Ranjit Singh, aforesaid. Sd/- Ranjit Singh.” 4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail on instructions. Counsel for the complainant submits that they would have no objection in case bail is granted to the petitioner. 7. Given the no objection of the complainant, no ground to deny bail to the petitioner is made out. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction
Decision
stand disposed of. 08.07.2025 Jyoti Sharma (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: Jyoti Sharma 2025.07.16 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh 3