The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed the second petition filed by Gurtej Singh @ Gurtej Singh Brar under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No. 79 dated 17.05.2024 registered at Police Station Jaito, Faridkot, District Faridkot. The Court held that the petition is not maintainable as the petitioner was already granted regular bail by the trial Court vide order dated 05.08.2024 and there is no substantial change in circumstances since the dismissal of his earlier anticipatory bail petition by this Court on 06.04.2026. The instant petition was filed on 16.04.2026 without disclosing any material change warranting reconsideration.
The FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Surinder Singh alleging that his niece Kulwinder Kaur, wife of the petitioner, was subjected to ill-treatment since marriage. It was alleged that on 16.05.2024 the petitioner threw the deceased on the bed while his mother caught hold of her arm and forcibly administered poisonous substance with intent to kill her. The victim died. Initially the case was registered under Sections 302 and 34 IPC. During investigation the offence under Section 302 IPC was deleted and Sections 306 and 201 IPC were added. The petitioner was arrested and granted regular bail by the trial Court. During trial the prosecution moved an application for alteration of charge which was allowed on 23.02.2026 and charges under Sections 302 and 201 IPC were ordered to be framed. Apprehending arrest pursuant to addition of Section 302 IPC the petitioner moved for anticipatory bail before the trial Court which was dismissed on 20.03.2026. His first petition before the High Court bearing CRM-M-18317-2026 was also dismissed on 06.04.2026.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no prima facie case under Section 302 IPC is made out as no external injury was found on the body of the deceased. Statements of the petitioner’s 14-year-old son and business partner indicate that he was not present at the residence at the relevant time. The petitioner has not misused the concession of regular bail granted earlier. It was submitted that the second petition is maintainable as certain aspects were not considered in the previous order. Reliance was placed on Sumit vs. State of U.P. and another, 2026 (1) RCR (Criminal) 765.
Learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant opposed the petition submitting that there is no change in circumstances since dismissal of the earlier petition. The appropriate remedy is to surrender before the trial Court and seek regular bail for the newly added offence rather than seeking anticipatory bail.
The High Court observed that the petitioner is already on regular bail and therefore in constructive custody of law. Relying on Manish Jain vs. Haryana State Pollution Control Board, 2022 (1) SCC (Cri) 676 and Pradeep Ram vs. State of Jharkhand and another, AIR 2019 SC 3193, the Court held that a person already released on bail cannot maintain a petition for anticipatory bail as there cannot be any apprehension of arrest. Referring to the legal position in Sumit’s case the Court enumerated the options available when graver offences are added after grant of bail including surrender and seeking regular bail or the investigating agency seeking cancellation of bail.
In view of the proposition of law the High Court held that an application for grant of anticipatory bail in the present circumstances is not maintainable. Finding no ground to allow the petition the same was dismissed.
Case Title: Gurtej Singh @ Gurtej Singh Brar Versus State of Punjab
Case No.: CRM-M-21018-2026 (O&M)
Coram: Justice Manisha Batra
Click HERE for full ORDER.
Lawcutor 