← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/18519/2026allowed

Gurmail Singh v. State Of Punjab

2026-04-10Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 10.04.2026 Gurmail Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present :- Mr. Rajan Singh Dadwal for the petitioner.

Mr. Ritu Raj Singh, DAG, Punjab.

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

This is the first petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.109 dated 18.09.2025, registered under Sections 118(1) and 3(5) of the BNS (erstwhile Sections 324 and 34 IPC) and subsequently, Section 118(2) of the BNS (erstwhile Section 326 IPC) added later-on, at Police Station Hathur, District Ludhiana. 2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the statement of the complainant Baljit Singh, who alleged that on 11.09.2025, when he reached near the house of Gurmail Singh, the petitioner started abusing him and in the meantime, co-accused Jaspal Singh pushed him from behind, due to which he fell on the ground. Thereafter, co-accused Paramjit Singh @ Pamma allegedly inflicted a sword blow on the little finger of his hand. Upon raising alarm, the accused

-2fled from the spot and the complainant was taken to the Civil Hospital for treatment. The alleged motive behind the occurrence was stated to be a dispute regarding throwing of garbage in the plot of the complainant. 3.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner and only allegation against him is that he abused the complainant. The grievous injury has been attributed to co-accused Jaspal Singh, that too on the little finger. The petitioner was not even stated to be carrying any weapon. The petitioner is in custody for about last three months, approximately.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition on the ground that the FIR has been registered under Section 118(2) of the BNS (erstwhile Section 326 IPC), which was added later-on as grievous injury has been caused to the complainant on his little finger by using a sharp-edged weapon, i.e sword, and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. However, he does not dispute the fact that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner and the same has been attributed to the co-accused, and that the petitioner is in custody for the last about three months.

5.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, this Court finds that no injury has been attributed to the petitioner and the only role assigned to him is that he allegedly abused the complainant. The grievous injury has been attributed to the co-accused. The petitioner is in custody for the last about three months. The conclusion of trial is likely to take some time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody.

-36.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner Gurmail Singh is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

7.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 10.04.2026 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No