Sunny v. State of Punjab

IN Sunny

State of P

Date of d Date of U CORAM Present:

SUMEET

¶1of the Bh 438 of C dated 14. Nyaya Sa Section 2 Gurdaspu

earlier be challenge order date Court for the instan Court. A

THE HIGH COURT OF PUN CHANDIG

V/s Punjab

decision: 06.07.2026 Uploading : 07.07.2026 M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advoc Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG ***** T GOEL, J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the p haratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhi r.P.C.) seeking the concession

03.2025 registered under Sectio anhita, 2023 (corresponding to 25 of the Arms Act at Police St ur. At the outset, it may be not een dismissed by this Court d the said order before the Hon' ed 15.05.2026 set aside the ord fresh consideration on merits. nt petition came up for receiving Accordingly, the matter has b

NJAB AND HARYANA AT ARH

CRM-M-23002-2026

....Petitioner

....Respondent SUMEET GOEL cate for the petitioner. G Punjab.

present petition under Section 4 ta, 2023 (corresponding to Secti of anticipatory bail in FIR No ons 103 and 3(5) of the Bharat o Sections 302 and 34 IPC) a tation Civil Lines, Batala, Distr ticed that the present petition h t. Aggrieved, the petitioner h 'ble Supreme Court, which vide der & remanded the matter to t It is in this factual backdrop, t g consideration at the hands of t been heard afresh after granti

ion .77 iya rict had has its this hat this

opportuni material o

¶2the comp stated tha came to h the Vijay searched overbridg Vijay Sin suspected altercation held in th present FI

2.1. that durin Chowki B

04.12.202 Station C Harsimran Station S allegedly contact w thereto ha Road, Ba

ity to both sides to address a on record. The prosecution case, as set-lainant namely Sulakhan Singh t on 13.03.2025 at about 6:30 PM his house and took his son Vijay y Singh did not return home, for him and when they reac ge at Nawan Pind Panch Khand ngh lying with a gunshot injur d that the Pretty has murdered n between Pretty and the decea he village on 09.03.2025. On th IR came to be registered. Para 7 of the reply dated 30 ng the course of investigation, Bus Stand, Batala, produced 25 registered under Sections 25 City Batala, alongwith disclosu njit Singh son of Ranjit Singh, Sekhwan. In the said disclosu disclosed that during the days with deceased Vijay Singh regar ad met deceased Vijay Singh atala. He further disclosed that h

arguments and place the relev -out in the petition in hand, is t h, father of deceased Vijay Sin M, one Pretty son of Jatinder Sin y Singh in a white i-20 car. Wh the complainant and his fam ched near the under constructi dal, they found the dead body ry on his chest. The complain his son on account of a previo ased during a Kabaddi tournam he basis of the said statement, .06.2026 filed by the State refle SI Jagtar Singh In-charge, Pol the copy of FIR No.226 da 5/54/59 of the Arms Act at Pol re statement suffered by accus resident of village Sherpur, Pol ure statement, Harsimranjit Sin of Hola Mohalla, he had been rding certain articles and pursu near Jalandhar Bypass, Amrit he, along with the deceased Vij

ant hat gh, ngh hen mily ion of ant ous ent ects lice ted lice lice ngh n in ant tsar

Singh, th Jashan V Batala. T together t 9:00/10:0 certain art petitioner and fired has been him in th Singh suc from the statement Harsimran nominated Nyaya Sa

¶3petitioner question. named in one Pretty no allega surfaced f itself, cre contended

e present petitioner Sunny resi Virk, consumed liquor at an A hereafter, at the instance of Vi towards Sahabpur. According to 0 PM, a dispute arose amongst t ticles. During the course of the s r), who is stated to be related to V a shot at Vijay Singh & as a res further alleged that thereafter th eir vehicle and removed him fro ccumbed to the gunshot injury, place of occurrence. On the t and the material collected njit Singh, Jashan Virk and th d as accused in the present case anhita, 2023 was added vide DDR Learned counsel for the r is innocent and has been fa Learned counsel has further it the FIR and the entire allegation y son of Jatinder Singh. It has b ation against the present petitio for the first time nearly ten mon eates a doubt regarding his im d that the petitioner is the cousin

ident of Sahabpur and co-accus Ahata situated on Amritsar Ro ijay Singh, all of them proceed o the disclosure statement, at abo them concerning money relating said altercation, Sunny (the pres Vijay Singh, allegedly used a pis sult thereof he fell on the ground e petitioner and the co-accused p om the spot. However, after Vij they abandoned his body and f basis of the aforesaid disclosu d during investigation, accus he present petitioner Sunny w e and Section 3(5) of the Bharat R No. 026 dated 07.12.2025. petitioner has iterated that alsely implicated into the FIR terated that the petitioner was n n contained in the FIR was agai been further contended that there ner in the FIR and his name h nths after the occurrence which, mplication. It has been furth n of the deceased Vijay Singh a

ad, ded out g to ent stol d. It put jay fled ure ere iya in not inst e is has by

there was cousin. L failed to a against hi emphasize evidence alleged cr basis of th Singh in under the contended the releva present at is situated Moreover nothing in has furthe when requ and shall pre-arrest bail is ent

¶4anticipato against th counsel,

s absolutely no motive for him Learned counsel has further co attribute any plausible motive to im rests upon conjectures and ed that the prosecution case is b and there is no direct evidence rime. Furthermore, the petitione he disclosure statement allegedly another case bearing FIR No. Arms Act which is a weak pie d that the petitioner was not pre ant date and time. According to t Baba Bakala Sahib along with h d at a considerable distance from r, there is no need for custodial ncriminating remains to be reco er asserted that the petitioner is w uired; shall not tamper with the also abide by all the conditions t bail. On strength of these sub treated for. Per contra, learned State c ory bail to the petitioner by ar he petitioner are serious and sp the role of the petitioner has

to commit the murder of his o ontended that the prosecution h o the petitioner and the entire ca assumptions. Learned counsel h based entirely upon circumstant connecting the petitioner with er has been implicated solely on y made by co-accused Harsimran 226 dated 04.12.2025 register ce of evidence. It has been furth esent at the place of occurrence learned counsel, the petitioner w his wife and minor daughter, wh m the alleged place of occurren l interrogation of the petitioner overed from him. Learned coun willing to join investigation as a evidence or influence any witn imposed in case he is enlarged bmissions, the grant of anticipato counsel has opposed the grant rguing that the allegations rais pecific. According to learned St s surfaced during the course

wn has ase has tial njit red her e at was ich nce. as nsel ess on ory of tate

investigat upon cred counsel h FIR but t the comm course of

04.12.202 Police Sta co-accuse Harsimran Vijay Sin consumed has been money an allegedly him on th the weapo custodial Furthermo before th substantia as 20 pro pending anticipato

tion and his involvement is not dible material collected by the in has emphasized that although th the investigation subsequently r mission of the offence. It has bee f investigation, the police obtain 25 registered under Sections 25 ation City Batala along with the ed Harsimranjit Singh. In the sai njit Singh disclosed that on the d ngh, the present petitioner Sunny d liquor together and thereafter further disclosed that a dispu nd during the course of the a took out a pistol and fired a gun he chest and resulted in his death on of offence is yet to be reco interrogation is essential for a ore, the challan against the co-a e competent Court of jurisdict ally progressed. It has been furth osecution witnesses cited by th before the Court below. In ory bail to the petitioner may adv

t based merely upon suspicion b nvestigating agency. Learned St he petitioner was not named in revealed his active participation en further submitted that during ned the copy of FIR No. 226 da 5, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act e disclosure statement suffered id disclosure statement, co-accus day of occurrence he, the deceas y and co-accused Jashan Virk h proceeded together in a vehicle ute arose amongst them regardi altercation, the present petition nshot at Vijay Singh, which stru h. It has been further submitted t overed from the petitioner and a fair and effective investigati accused has already been presen tion and the prosecution case h her submitted that there are as ma he prosecution and the matter n such circumstances, grant versely affect the investigation a

but tate n in ted t at by had . It ing ner uck hat his on. ted has any r is

prosecutio dismissal

¶5gone throu

¶6in nature resulted in investigat Harsimran police, th company investigat together Khandal ( village. A during the took out was alleg death. Th but attrib deceased. accused p subsequen the petitio not based

on of the case. Accordingly, of the instant petition. I have heard the learned cou ugh the available record of the c Indubitably, the role attribute but specific and direct in the nto loss of life. As per the mate tion, particularly the disclo njit Singh and the subsequent he petitioner alongwith co-accu of the deceased immediately tion has further reflected that a whereinafter they proceeded t (i.e. the place of occurrence) in As per the prosecution, a monet e course of the said altercation, a pistol and fired a gunshot at gedly inflicted on the chest of t e allegations not only suggest pr bute to him the fatal shot wh Furthermore, after the incident persons, made efforts to remov ntly abandoned his body before oner, as per the prosecution, is on vague or omnibus allegation

a prayer has been made for unsel for the rival parties and ha case. ed to the petitioner is not periphe e commission of the crime wh erial collected during the course osure statement of co-accus t investigation conducted by used was allegedly present in y prior to the occurrence. T all of them had consumed liqu towards village Nawapind Pan the car to drop the petitioner at tary dispute arose among them a it was the petitioner who alleged deceased Vijay Singh. The inju the deceased which resulted in resence of the petitioner at the sp hich resulted in the death of t, the petitioner, along with the c e the deceased from the spot a e fleeing away. Thus, at this sta an assailant whose involvement ns. The plea of the petitioner that

ave eral ich e of The uor nch his dly ury his pot co-age, t is

is the cou offence, i of plea fo to determ not. Simi present at conclusiv based upo stage.

¶7the weapo recovered custodial of the wea petitioner grant him investigat has surfa considera meticulou collected of the of surroundi cause dea

usin of the deceased and, theref s a matter which cannot be exam r grant of anticipatory bail. At th ine whether a prima facie case is ilarly, the plea of alibi raised b t the spot, is a disputed questi ely adjudicated at this stage. Th on a disclosure statement also d Another significant aspect w on allegedly used in the commiss d. The stand of the investigating interrogation of the petitioner is apon and the motive behind the r has not been named in the FIR m the concession of pre-arr tion is still underway and materi aced during the course of i ation of plea for grant of ant usly examine the admissibility/ by the investigating agency. It ffence is to be assessed on ng circumstances and the act do ath is sufficient.

fore, has no motive to commit mined at the stage of considerati his stage, the Court is only requir s made out against the petitioner by the petitioner, that he was n ion of fact which also cannot he plea that the prosecution case does not persuade this Court at t which weighs with this Court is t sion of the offence has not yet be agency before this Court is that s necessary to ascertain the sou occurrence. The mere fact that R does not, by itself, be a ground rest bail, particularly when al connecting him with the offen investigation. At the stage ticipatory bail this Court cann evidentiary value of the mater is well-settled that the seriousn the basis of the allegations a one with intention or knowledge

ion red r or not be e is this hat een rce d to nce of not rial ess

7.1. anticipato of the ind investigat carried o response t granting investigat from whi implicated considerin between s Court oug attributed deeper an stage, the made out the prelim accusation petitioner investigat 1039, the

It is settled law that while ory bail, the Court must strike a b dividual and the need for free, fa tion is at a nascent stage and v ut. Such offences necessitate to prevent their recurrence. In th anticipatory bail at this stage tion. No cause nay plausible ca ich it can be deciphered that d in the present FIR. It is bef ng a plea for grant of anticipator safeguarding individual rights an ght to reckon with the magnitude d to the accused; the need for fai nd wide impact of such alleged ere is no material on record to h against the petitioner. The mate minary investigation, appears to e ns. Thus, it is not appropriate r, as it would necessarily tion. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1 Hon'ble Supreme Court held as "6. We find force in the submissi qualitatively more elicitation-orie well-ensconced with a favourable a case like this, effective inter tremendous advantage in disinter

considering the plea for grant balance between the right of libe air and effective investigation. T verification of facts are yet to a strong and principled judic he considered opinion of this Cou may likely hamper the on-goi ause has been shown, at this sta t the petitioner has been fals fitting to mention here that wh ry bail, the Court has to equilibr nd protecting societal interests. T e and nature of the offence; the r ir and free investigation as also d iniquities on the society. At t hold that a prima facie case is n erial which has come on record a establish a reasonable basis for to grant anticipatory bail to cause impediment in effect 1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (C under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) ion of CBI that custodial interrogation ented than questioning a suspect who e order under Section 438 of the Code rrogation of a suspected person is rring many useful informations and a

of erty The be cial urt, ing age, ely hile rate The ole this not ive Cri) n is o is e. In s of

¶8role attrib interrogat Court is o juncture m petitioner milieu of

9.

(i)

(ii) of opinion

(iii)

July 06, 2 Ajay

materials which would have interrogation would elude if the protected and insulated by a pre interrogated. Very often interroga a mere ritual. The argument tha with the danger of the person b need not be countenanced, for, su accused in all criminal cases. Th police officers would conduct th would not conduct themselves as o Considering the nature and g buted to the petitioner and t tion of the petitioner for an eff of the considered view that the may adversely affect the course r does not deserve the concession the case in hand. In view of the prevenient rati The instant petition is devoid Nothing said hereinabove sh n upon merits of the case/investig Pending application(s), if any

2026

been concealed. Success in s suspected person knows that he is w e-arrest bail order during the time he ation in such a condition would reduce at the custodial interrogation is frau being subjected to third-degree meth uch an argument can be advanced by he Court has to presume that responsi hemselves in task of disintering offen offenders." gravity of the offence, the speci the requirement of the custod ffective and fair investigation, t e grant of anticipatory bail at t of investigation. Accordingly, n of anticipatory bail in the fact iocination, it is ordained thus: d of merits and is hereby dismiss hall be deemed to be an expressi gation. y, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

uch well e is e to ught ods y all ible nces ific dial this this ual sed.