Harry v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-47886-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-47886-2025 Reserved on: 11.09.2025 Pronounced on: 30.09.2025 Harpreet Singh @ Harry ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Rahi Mehra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Lokesh Garg, Advocate for Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate, for the complainant. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 67 27.03.2025 Gharinda, Distt. Amritsar 115(2), 109, 191(3), 190 BNS and 25, 27 of Arms Act 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. As per paragraph 19 of the bail petition, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. 3. The facts and allegations are taken from the para 3 of the reply, which reads as follows: “3. That the deponent humbly submits that as per the official record available at the police station and as per the report furnished by the Station House Officer of Police Station Gharinda, Amritsar Rural, on 27.03.2025, the statement of the Complainant Surjit Singh was recorded by ASI Sahib Singh, Incharge Police Post Rajatal, Police Station Gharinda, Amritsar Rural. The complainant alleged in his statement that, "I am a resident of the aforesaid address and I work as a mason. On dated 26.03.2025, at about 7:30 PM, I was standing in the street along with my younger brother Gursevak Singh, son of Achhar Singh, resident of the aforesaid address. At that time, Harpreet Singh @ Harry (present petitioner), son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of village Ladhewal; Ansh; Pali DJ Wala, residents of Ladhewal; and Love, son of Harjit Singh, resident of Rasoolpur Kallar, along with other unidentified boys, about 7/8 unknown persons riding on about 3/4 motorcycles, went to the grocery shop of our 1 JYOTI 2025.09.30 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-47886-2025 village Bani. All of them were in a drunken state of intoxication. (Motive) My younger brother Gursevak told them that there is a house of girls and sisters in front, so they should not come here. At this, all of them became enlarged and starting abusing and manhandling me and my brother. My elder brother Lakhbir Singh also tried to make them understand. After some time, they went a little away from our house, but then, after hatching a plan, they picked up bricks from the heap and started pelting bricks and stones at us, due to which my brother Gursevak Singh sustained many injuries and became seriously wounded. Thereafter, Harpreet @ Harry took out a pistol from his waist band and with the intention to kill, fired 03 shots towards me, out of which one shot hit my right shoulder and the other hit the calf of my right leg. We all started raising alarm by shouting "Mar ditta, mar ditta". Thereafter, all the persons, along with their respective vehicles and weapons, fled away from the spot. Then, with the arrangement of conveyance by my family members, 1 and my brother Gursevak Singh were admitted for treatment at Sunrise Multispecialty Hospital, Amritsar. I shall produce MLR with regard to my injuries and injuries of my brother. The legal action may be taken against all the aforesaid persons:" Therefore, based on the aforesaid statement the case FIR No. 67, dated 27.03.2025, under Section 115 (2), 109, 191 (3), 190 BNS and 25, 27 Arms Act, Police Station Gharinda, Amritsar Rural was registered by ASI Sahib Singh.” 4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and his family. 5. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State may file an application to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and may do so at their discretion, to which the petitioner shall have no objection. 6. The State as well as counsel for the complainant opposes bail and refers to the reply. 7. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows: “6. That the deponent humbly submits that the complainant-injured Surjit Singh and his brother-injured Gursewak Singh were admitted to Sunrise Multi-Speciality Hospital, Hide Market, near Civil Hospital, GT Road, Amritsar and their MLRs were issued at Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar. Hence, the relevant treatment record (bed head tickets) were obtained from Sunrise Multi-Speciality Hospital and request has been made to the concerned doctor of Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar for providing MLR and subsequent opinion qua injuries of the complainant- injured Surjit Singh and his brother-injured Gursewak Singh, which are yet to be provided and follow up is being made to obtain the same at the earliest. However, as per medical record obtained from Sunrise Multi- Speciality Hospital, Amritsar, the injured Gursewak Singh had sustained JYOTI 2025.09.30 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 2 CRM-M-47886-2025 blunt head injury and as per NCCT Scan brain, fracture in right nasal bone with hemosinus in left sphenoid sinus was detected. As per medical record of the complainant-injured Surjit Singh had been admitted to Sunrise Multi-Speciality Hospital, Amritsar with history of gunshot injury at 7:30 PM on 26.3.20125 near Jathoal by known persons. He was found having injuries on right leg middle of leg and right shoulder.” 8. It shall be relevant to refer to para 12 of the bail petition, which reads as follows: “12. That the injury is shown to be on the shoulder and the leg and is on non vital part of the body. Nothing has come on record regarding the nature of the injuries neither in the investigation nor in the order as passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge.” 9. It shall be relevant to refer to para 12 of the reply, which reads as follows: “12. Role of the petitioner:- That the deponent humbly submits that at the time of commission of crime, the present petitioner Harpreet Singh was armed with a pistol and he had fired 03 gunshots at the complainant Surjit Singh with an intention to kill him, which had hit on his right shoulder and right leg, which is corroborated from the statements of the complainant and another injured Gursewak Singh as well as medical record obtained from Sunrise Multi-Speciality Hospital, Amritsar.” REASONING: 10. An analysis of the investigation explicitly indicates that the petitioner had fired at the victim. Role attributed to petitioner is heinous, as such, he is not entitled to anticipatory bail. 11. A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached primafacie points towards the petitioner’s involvement and does not make out a case for anticipatory bail. The impact of crime would also not justify anticipatory bail. Any further discussions will likely prejudice the petitioner; this court refrains from doing so. 12. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 13. Petition dismissed. Interim order dated 11.09.2025 qua stay on arrest is recalled
Decision
with immediate effect. All pending applications, if any, are disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 30.09.2025 Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes No. JYOTI 2025.09.30 15:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 3