Lovepreet Singh v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M-9154-2026 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.256 CRM-M-9154-2026 Decided on : 24.03.2026 Lovepreet Singh ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM :
*** Present :
Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amritpal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab for the respondent(s)-State.
Mr. Gursharan Singh, Advocate for the complainant.
*** , J (ORAL)
!"#!#$
#!$%"$%$" &
' ()
* +, $#!$ ( --$,.
#
$
$
/
0
.
.
"$!!$!!!10
2
3
.
4
CRM-M-9154-2026 2
.
3
)
)
/
.
.
(
!!.
(
)
. 5
5 )
. 6 /
$ ! )
2.
4
.
/ - . / ) -
( $
) / . 3
$/ )
$
/
$/ - 4 ) .
.
..
4
.
)) .
. .
% 3
.
$ /
$
)
. $
$ )
" 4)
$ )
.
!!.
5 )
. 5
$ ) .5 6
! ) 2.
CRM-M-9154-2026 3
. - . $ /
)
.
7
/ ) )
, #
&
'.
$ / 4 ,2&
- .
$
)$
.
.
$
, #&
6.
The foundational concept of the criminal jurisprudence is to ensure speedy trial. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated that right to speedy trial is enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial would cover investigation, enquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial etc. i.e. everything starting with the accusation against the accused and expiring with the final verdict of the last Court. 10.
In this regard, reference is being made to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India on the following decision:- Akhtari Bi Vs. State of M.P., (2001) 4 SCC 355, Surinder Singh Alias Shingara Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2005) SCC (Crl) 1674, P. Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578, Babu Singh and others Vs. State of U.P., (1978) 1 SCC 579, Takht Singh and others Vs. State of M.P., (2001) 10 SCC 463; Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.2356 of 2010,
CRM-M-9154-2026 4 Kushal Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2JJ.) and Fazal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2012) 5 SCC 752.
,
.
))
1 . .
* +$
'.
4 .& !" !
# $
$
.
'
))
1
* +( )
'.
/:0
!
!
!
12.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned. It is clarified that nothing stated herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 13.
The present petition is disposed of accordingly. ..
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No ;
:< 1
CRM-M-9154-2026 5