CRM-M-38162 of 2021 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH
***
CRM-M-38162 of 2021
Date of Decision: 30.9.2021

Gurdas Maan

Petitioner
Versus

State of Punjab
Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Present: Mr. R. S. Cheema, Senior Advocate with

Ms. Tarannum Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. R. S. Bains, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Vivek Vikas Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
****

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (Oral):

Due to COVID-19 situation, the Court is convened through

video conference.

On 15.9.2021, this Court passed the following order:

“[1] Due to COVID-19 situation, the Court is convened

through video conference.
[2] This petition under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.']
is filed seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No. 141, dated 26th
August, 2021 under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 [hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'], registered at Police
Station City Nakodar, District Jalandhar Rural.
[3] The F.I.R. was got registered by Paramjit Singh
Akali, member of Sikh Youth Power of Punjab. The
allegations are that petitioner while performing in the Urs of

1 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2023 12:20:42 :::
CRM-M-38162 of 2021 -2-

Sai Murad Shah Ji at the premises of Dera Baba Murad Shah

Ji Trust made certain comments which hurt the religious
sentiments of a community. His act was against the Sikh
Maryada as he recited the hymns of Shri Guru Granth Sahib
Ji at Marri (Mausoleum).
[4] Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner submits that no case is made out under Section
295A of IPC as there was no deliberate or malicious
intention of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner
has been decorated by various awards for his contribution
towards Punjabiat. He is a renowned name so far as his
contribution to Punjabi music and devotional music is
concerned. The petitioner himself is a devout Sikh. The
petitioner on realizing that his words have hurt the
sentiments of a community, uploaded a video apologizing
for his conduct. The video was uploaded prior to registration
of F.I.R. He further contends that investigating officer while
appearing before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar
had stated that custodial interrogation is not required,
however the contention was not noted in the impugned
order.
[5] Though complainant is not impleaded as party
but is represented by counsel who vehemently oppose the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
[6] Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Senior Deputy
Advocate General, Punjab on instructions submits that
custodial interrogation is not required as no recovery is to be
made.
[7] The issue as to whether words used by the
petitioner while performing on the stage were deliberate or
malicious, which is a basic necessity for invoking Section
295A IPC, would be subject matter of the investigation.

2 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2023 12:20:42 :::
CRM-M-38162 of 2021 -3-

Suffice to say that an artist while performing on a stage has

inclination to take the crowd alongwith him. No further
comment is made at this stage.
[8] Petitioner is a renowned Punjabi singer. He is
not a personality who would be able to hide or abscond
himself from investigation or trial. No recovery is to be made,
the case is set up on a viral video.
[9] It would be pertinent to note at this stage that
basic foundation of democracy is secularism and freedom of
expression. However, with advancement of technology
whatever positive social media might have provided but one
thing is ensured that each and every act or conduct spreads
like a wild fire.
[10] In the impugned order it is observed that
petitioner by apologizing has admitted the occurrence. The
issue is not about the disputing event, the apology could have
been a step by the petitioner to resolve the issue in the
nascent stage.
[11] Considering the facts and circumstances in
totality, the petitioner is granted interim bail subject to his
joining investigation within a week. In the event of arrest, he
shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing adequate
bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. He is
directed to join the investigation as and when called for. He
shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section
438(2) Cr.P.C.
[12] List on 30th September, 2021.”

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner has tested for Corona positive. He further submits that the

petitioner will join the investigation as soon as he recovers from Covid-19.

3 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2023 12:20:42 :::
CRM-M-38162 of 2021 -4-

On instructions, he submits that in the meantime, the petitioner volunteers

to join the investigation through video conference if investigating agency so

desires. He seeks four weeks time for physically joining the investigation.

Further submission is that no recovery is to be made from the petitioner

even as per the stand taken by the State.

It is not being disputed by learned counsel for the State that the

petitioner has tested Corona positive and she reiterates the stand that

custody is not required.

Learned senior counsel for the complainant vehemently

opposes the prayer for confirmation of interim bail.

As no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, the

interim bail granted on 15.9.2021 is made absolute.

Let the petitioner join the investigation within five weeks from

today. In meantime Investigating Officer may join petitioner through video

conference.

In case of failure of the petitioner to join the investigation

within five weeks, the State would be at liberty to move an application for

re-calling the order.

[AVNEESH JHINGAN]
JUDGE
30th September, 2021
mk
1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes /No
2. Whether reportable : Yes /No

4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2023 12:20:42 :::