Rohit Kumar Alias Neela Dhobi v. State Of Punjab

-1-

(222) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 13.05.2026 ROHIT KUMAR ALIAS NEELA DHOBI ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. S.K. Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Toor, AAG Punjab.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS (corresponding Section 439 of Cr.P.C) is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.472 dated 04.11.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 148, 149 of the IPC (109, 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS) at Police Station City Faridkot, District Faridkot.

2.

The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Sajan and reads as under:- "Statement of Sajan son of Rajinder Singh son of Surjit Singh, resident of Dogar Basti, Street No. 11-L, Faridkot aged about 24 years Mob. No. 96463-45755 stated that I am resident of the above said address and I am student of BCA. Today, I was going to Chahal Road on motorcycle and my friend Binder Singh and Rohit Kumar son of Faqir Chand were going in front of me on their motor cycle and Rohit was driving the motorcycle

-2and Binder Singh a sitting at his back side and when we reached head of the Railway Crossing and were near the orchard and about 11:30 AM 3 motorcycles on which Rohit @ Neela Dhobi back side Shahid Bhagat Singh Faridkot, Sagar resident of Balbir Basti, Street No. 10R, Faridkot, Rahul, resident of Jogian Wala Mohalla, Ringi, resident of Balbir Basti, Romi resident of Kameyana Gate, Karan Bachi son of Kinder Singh, resident of Araiyana Wala Road, Faridkot, Happy Bola and Bundi, resident of Bajigar Basti, Faridkot armed with Kappas and Kirpans.

Neela Dhobi and Sagar were armed with pistols and they while bringing their motorcycle near the motorcycle of Binder Singh caught hold of him and Rohit ran on the motorcycle while Binder Singh fell down, then Rohit took Kappa from his co-accused and gave a blow of the same on the head of Binder Singh with intention to kill him which hit on left side on the forehead and then Rahul took his Kapa and Ringi and Romi gave injuries with their respective weapons and when we raised the alarm of Marta Marta and all of them after seeing the people gathering ran on their motorcycle alongwith their weapons.

-3order to save me raised my left hand, then they gave many blows of Kirpan and Kappa due to which in index finger was cut and I received a injuries on my left and right leg above the knees and other injuries also on my body and I have come to know afterwards that they have cut the left wrist of Rohit and the surgery of the same is being done by Doctor Sahib and apart from this they have also given many injuries with the intention to kill us. Reason: behind this occurrence is that on 04.08.2021 we have given injuries to Karan @ Bachin regarding which there was FIR under Section 307 registered against us. In which I have got bail. The Doctor Sahib is treating us. I have recorded my statement which is true and correct one. So legal action be taken against the above said accused Sd/-Sajan attested Jaskaran Singh SI PS City Faridkot dated 04.11.2022."

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. As he is in custody since 28.01.2023 but only 08 of the 34 prosecution witnesses have 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, particularly when four co-accused namely Rahul @ Karamvir Singh, Sagar Singh @ Sagar, Gagandeep Singh @ Happy Bola and Gursahib Singh @ Ringi have been granted the concession of bail vide orders dated 16.06.2023, 10.12.2024, 12.12.2024 and 09.03.2026 respectively. 4.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the petitioner has been attributed the role of causing an injury leading to the amputation of the wrist of Rohit. The cases of the co-accused are on a

-4different footing. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail as prayed for. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 28.01.2023 but only 08 of the 34 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.

As per the case of the prosecution, the petitioner has caused an injury leading to the amputation of the wrist of Rohit. The allegations are extremely grave. Merely because the petitioner has been in custody since 28.01.2023 is not sufficient to grant him the concession of bail as prayed for, in view of the nature of the allegations levelled against him. 7.

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I find no merit in the present petition and the same stands dismissed. 8.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 13.05.2026 Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No