← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/12951/2024dismissed

Jaikaranvir Singh @ Karan v. State Of Punjab

2025-04-22Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 1) Decided on : 22.04.2025 Jaikaranvir Singh @ Karan . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s) 2) Yudhvir Singh @ Judhbir Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate, for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-12951-2024).

Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-2786-2025).

Mr. Jasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Viresh Dahiya, Advocate and Ms. Sonakshi Chaudhary, Advocate for the complainant.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

This order shall dispose of CRM-M-12951-2024 & CRM-M2786 of 2025, as both the petitions are interconnected and have arisen out of same FIR. However, the lead case is CRM-M-12951-2024. 2.

The instant petitions have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioners, during the pendency of trial, who have been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

- 2 - Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Jaikaranvir Singh @ Karan (petitioner in CRM-M-1295129.05.2020 302, 148, 149 IPC Gharinda Amritsar Rural Yudhvir Singh @ Judhbir Singh (petitioners in CRM-M2786 of 2025) 3.

In the present regular bail petitions, on 10.03.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Present petitions have been filed by the petitioners, seeking regular bail in case FIR No.0072 dated 29.05.2020, under Sections 302, 148, 149 of IPC, registered at Police Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural.

2.

The allegations against the petitioner namely Jaikaranvir Singh @ Karan, are that he was holding a knife and, along with the other accused, gave blows to the deceased, namely, Deputy Singh. 3.

Primarily, counsel for the petitioners) submits that on 16.08.2023 (in CRM-M-22943-2021 and CRM-M-13723-2022), when bail petitions filed by both the petitioners were listed, learned State counsel gave his statement that except of one prosecution witness, all have been examined.

4.

Today, learned State counsel, as per the instructions received by him, informs the Court that total 6 witnesses are yet to be examined, out of which, one is material witness.

5.

List again on 22.04.2025.

6.

Let a status report be filed by learned State counsel on the next date of hearing. An explanation be also sought from the trial Court to explain, as to why the progress in the trial proceedings are at a very low pace.

7.

A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case."

4.

Today, status report dated 03.04.2025, has been forwarded by the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Amritsar (Trial Court), wherein, it has been explained that out of total 29 prosecution witnesses, 17 have been examined and 9 witnesses have been given up by the prosecution.

- 3 - 5.

By expressing regret over the delay in the proceedings, the Trial Court has assured to make all sincere efforts to conclude the trial as early as possible.

6.

Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) does not press his prayer for bail at this stage.

7.

Disposed of, as having been not pressed.

Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE April 22, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No