Manpreet Singh Alias Rinku v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Date of Decision:- 14.05.2026 Manpreet Singh @ Rinku ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Abhaysher Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

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

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.49 dated 18.03.2020, registered under Sections 302, 380, 34 of IPC 1860 (Sections 411, 460 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab. 2.

Briefly stated that the allegations against the present petitioner are that he is alleged to have caused death of Rajiv Kumar (deceased) along with his co-accused by lurking house trespass during the night and stole jewellery articles from house of the complainant. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for concession of bail to the petitioner on the following grounds:

I. That the petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2020 i.e. for the last more than 06 years and 01 month.

II. Petitioner is having clean and clear antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal activity, except the present one.

( 2 ) III. Case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of coaccused, Beer Singh @ Vicky, who has already been granted regular bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2025 passed in CRM-M-67430-2025.

IV. The trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. 4.

Status report by way of an affidavit of Arun Mundan, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib along with custody certificate, has been filed by learned State counsel and the same are taken on record.

5.

Learned State Counsel opposed the present petition on the following grounds:

I. That the allegations against the present petitioner are specific as he was seen in the CCTV footage while holding bags.

II. That the petitioner was involved in one more case under Prisons Act, however, he is on bail in that case (as per custody certificate). However, it is not disputed by learned State counsel that case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of co-accused, namely, Beer Singh @ Vicky, who has already been granted concession of regular bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court.

6.

Heard.

7.

Keeping in view the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds merits in the present petition on the following grounds:

( 3 ) I. That the petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2020 i.e. for the last more than 06 years and 01 month and 11 days.

II. Petitioner is having clean and clear antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal activity, except the present one. III. Case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of coaccused, namely, Beer Singh @ Vicky, who has already been granted regular bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2025 passed in CRM-M-67430-2025 (Annexure P-3). IV. The trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period.

8.

As concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is a rule, jail is an exception. Hence, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 9.

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 on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. ( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 14.05.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No