Kartar Singh @ Raju v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-18980-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18980-2026 Date of Decision: 16.04.2026 KARTAR SINGH @ RAJU ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Rishu Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.134 dated 19.11.2025 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 115(2), 109, 118(1), 351(2), 298, 191(3), 190 and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 (Section 238 added later on) at Police Station Maloud, District Ludhiana. 2.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and his co-accused assaulted the complainant-Rachhpal Singh @ Pala. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that taking the prosecution case to be correct, the petitioner has been attributed the role of having caused a simple injury with a small sword on the back of the head of the complainant. As the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025 but none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

3.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that all the accused brutally assaulted the complainant leading to the registration of the FIR. The nature of the allegations does not entitle the petitioner to the KUSUM 2026.04.17 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRM-M-18980-2026 -2concession of bail as prayed for. He, however, concedes that the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature, that the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025 but none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5.

The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025 but none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 6.

Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner Kartar Singh @ Raju S/o Ram Krishan is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 7.

If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

8.

The petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 16.04.2026 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No KUSUM 2026.04.17 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh