Sukhdev Singh @ Sabi v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15817-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.05.2026 Sukhdev Singh @ Sabi ... Petitioner Vs.
State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA
Present:
Ms. Navjot Kaur, Advocate for Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
******* SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (ORAL) 1.
By way of present petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNSS'), the petitioner is seeking regular bail in the case bearing FIR No.266 dated 31.12.2025 under Sections 308(4), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') (Section 111 of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Beas, Amritsar. 2.
In the present case, the allegations qua the petitioner are that he
-2along with Lakhwinder Kaur used to supply the mobile numbers of businessmen and other rich persons to gangster/main accused Balwinder Singh @ Dony and sent the mobile number of the complainant to him. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the following grounds: - (i) Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of secret information and except that, no incriminating material has come on record during the investigation regarding his complicity.
(ii) Petitioner is in custody since 21.01.2026 i.e. for the last more than 04 months and 04 days;
(iii) Investigation is complete and challan has been presented; and (iv) Trial will take sufficient time to conclude; 4.
Custody certificate of the petitioner, which is dated 25.05.2026, has been filed in the Court today and the same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. 5.
On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Daljit Singh, has opposed the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that present petitioner passed information to main accused, who made a call to the complainant demanding ransom. However, on a Court query, whether there is any other evidence except the disclosure statement or secret information to
-3support the allegations qua the petitioner that he supplied the information to main accused through Whatsapp or in the form of CD-R, learned State counsel submits that there is no such type of evidence against the petitioner. 6.
Heard.
7.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court finds merit in the present petition for grant of concession of regular bail to the petitioner on the following grounds: - (a) Petitioner has been in custody for a period of 04 months and 04 days;
(b) Apart from disclosure statement/secret information, there is no material available on record to prove the complicity of the petitioner;
(c) Investigation has been completed and challan stands presented; and (d) Trial will take sufficient time to conclude. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody for any further period.
8.
Concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment as culpability of accused is to be decided after appreciating evidence adduced by both the parties. It is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.
-49.
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. 10.
The pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
[ SUBHAS MEHLA ] 26.05.2026 JUDGE vishnu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No