Khawinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19321-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.04.2026 Khawinder Singh

...Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Ms. Neha Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Dr. (Ms.) Savi Nagpal, AAG Punjab.

***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1.

This second petition has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner(s) in case bearing FIR No.232 dated 27.05.2021, registered under Section(s) 302, 307, 148, 149 (Sections 379, 411 added later on) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Patran, District Patiala, after having the earlier bail petition dismissed on 27.02.2025.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the earlier bail petition was dismissed on merits, however, the reason for filing the present petition is solely the long custody period of the petitioner. She contends that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.05.2021 and has undergone an actual custody of nearly 04 years 11 months. It is submitted that only 05 prosecution witnesses out of 32 have been examined so far and since the dismissal of earlier bail petition in February-2025, no witness had been MANGAL SINGH 2026.04.17 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-19321-2026 (O&M) examined. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner had moved a separate petition i.e. CRM-M-68267-2025 seeking an expeditious conclusion of the trial and the said petition was disposed of vide order dated 04.12.2025 by this Court directing the trial Court to take appropriate steps. She contends that even though 04 witnesses were examined till the month of December, however, despite a lapse of nearly 04 months, only 01 more witness has been examined so far. Hence, the pace of the trial has not gained any momentum. It is also contended that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case.

3.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into consideration the long custody of the petitioner, his clean antecedents and the stage of the trial, I deem it fit to allow the instant petition. 4.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/heavy surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate concerned.

5.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

6.

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 17.04.2026 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2026.04.17 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document