Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/41327/2026 of AMRIK SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 28 July 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.41327 of 2026 Date of Decision:-28.07.2026 Amrik Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Harsh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. VIKRAM
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
107
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.41327 of 2026 Date of Decision:-28.07.2026
Amrik Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Harsh Chopra, Advocate
for the petitioner.
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) is for the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.26 dated 24.02.2020 under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNS’) [Sections 333 and 61(2) of the BNS added later on], registered at Police Station Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was already facing trial, having been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. He submits that vide order dated 15.11.2025 (Annexure P-3), application under Section 216 Cr.P.C., was allowed and additional charge under Section 452 IPC was framed. He submits that pursuant thereto, only on YAG DUTT 2026.07.28 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.41327 of 2026 -2-
02.07.2026, the petitioner could not appear as a result of which non- bailable warrants were issued to procure the presence of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to appear before the Court concerned but apprehends that the moment he appears, he would be taken into custody.
3. Concededly, the petitioner was regularly appearing before the Court, till charge under Section 452 IPC was framed. Pursuant thereto, he did not appear on 02.07.2026. Since the absence does not appear to be willful, it would be in the interest of justice that the petitioner is permitted to appear before the Court concerned.
4. That being so, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case, the petitioner appears before the Court concerned within a period of one week from today i.e. on or before 04.08.2026 and moves an application for bail, the same be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Till the time the same is decided, the petitioner be not arrested.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) July 28, 2026
JUDGE Yag Dutt
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.07.28 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.