Rajeev Kumar v. State Of Punjab And Another

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-8815-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 09.03.2026 Rajeev Kumar ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Suneet Pal Singh Aulakh, Advoacate for the petitioner. Mr. Adesh Pal Singh, AAG, Punjab.

***** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.127 dated 08.10.2021 under Sections 323, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 21(1) and 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957, registered at Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in compliance of order dated 22.01.2026 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-3503-2026 (Annexure P-8), the petitioner surrendered and is in custody since 04.02.2026, i.e. for the last about one month; the matter has been compromised between the parties via compromise deed dated 07.01.2026 (AnnexureP-7). A petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise has been filed and statement of parties have already been recorded. Thus, the petitioner deserves to be released on regular bail. GEETA RANI 2026.03.11 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

CRM-M-8815-2026 (O&M) ( 2 ) 3.

Mr. Jasjeet Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4 today and has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. He has admitted the factum of compromise. 4.

Learned State counsel opposed the bail petition by submitting that there are serious allegation against the petitioner and he was actively involved in commission of offence.

5.

Heard.

6.

Keeping in view the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4, the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2026, and that the matter has been compromised between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 7.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail by the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned on his furnishing requisite bonds and imposing such conditions so that the presence of the petitioner be secured during trial as and when required.

( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 09.03.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No GEETA RANI 2026.03.11 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh