Ravinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20930-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.04.2026 Ravinder Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab.

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0006 dated 05.01.2026, registered under Sections 109, 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(3), 351(1), 351(3) BNS and 25, 27 of Arms Act, at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur.

2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 3 months. There is a delay of 12 days in lodging the FIR. The injury attributed to the petitioner is on the left elbow with a datar which is declared as simple in nature. Even the petitioner and co-accused Hira received injuries at the hands of complainant, in that regard MLR, Annexures P2 and P3 have been referred. Co-accused Dilbag Singh has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 28.01.2026, Annexure P6. Challan stands presented on 04.04.2026, charges have not been framed and there are total 14 PWs. He is involved in two more cases, wherein he is on bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382.

3.

The custody certificate dated 22.04.2026 filed by the learned State

counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 3 months.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having actively participated in the commission of offence. He, however, is unable to controvert with regard to stage, co-accused having been granted bail and petitioner being on bail in other cases.

5.

Heard.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for 3 months; on bail in other cases; co-accused is on bail; challan stands presented on 04.05.2026, charges are yet to be framed and there are total 14 PWs; the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed. 7.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid,

it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

8.

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

9.

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 24.04.2026 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No