Karnail Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.22995 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.08.2025 Karnail Singh ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Mr. G. S. Sidhu, Advocate and Mr. A. S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simran Goria, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

***** Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.162, dated 03.11.2024, under Sections 109, 115(2), 190 & 61(2) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana. 2.

Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Jagraj Singh @ Ladi. It was alleged that he was elected as Sarpanch of the village and on account of which, Sukhdev Singh, Ex-Member, Panchayat and his accomplices, namely, Karnail Singh @ Raju (petitioner), Amarjit Singh, Binder Singh and Peeta Singh were keeping grudge against him. Hence on 01.11.2024, on the day of Diwali, they all encircled the

-2nephew of complainant, namely, Manvir Singh and started beating him. The accused including the petitioner had started giving fist blows to him whereas Binder Singh caught hold of Manvir Singh and thereafter, Karnail Singh @ Raju (petitioner) hit complainant's nephew, namely, Manvir Singh with stone on his face with intention to kill. His nephew suffered injuries on the neck and right eye and some internal injuries. He was shifted to the Hospital. Thus the request was made to take legal action against the accused. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The petitioner was arrested on 08.11.2024. On the completion of investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of the charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana praying for the grant of bail.

However, after hearing both the sides finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana declined the petition filed by the petitioner vide order dated 08.01.2025. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court praying for the grant of bail by way of filing CRM-M-7326-2025, however the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 08.04.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court by way of filing the present second petition praying for the grant of regular bail. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case because of the rivalry in the village due to the Panchayat elections. He has submitted that even otherwise the allegations made against the petitioner are that he gave stone injuries on the nose of he nephew of the

-3complainant, namely, Manvir Singh. He has submitted that no offence as alleged under Section 109 of BNS is made out against the petitioner. He has submitted that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Gurwinder Singh @ Binder Singh has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-6146-2025 and thus, case of the petitioner is at par with that of the co-accused. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since 08.11.2024, however there is no progress in the trial. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail. 4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State however has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner along with co-accused has formed unlawful assembly and with the intention to kill Manvir Singh, i.e. the nephew of complainant, all of them had played an active role in committing the offence. She, on instructions, has submitted that out of 12 prosecution witnesses, no witness has been examined so far. She has endorsed the fact that co-accused of the petitioner has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025. 5.

Heard.

6.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner has been alleged to have given the stone blows on the nose of injured, Manvir Singh. The injury alleged to be falling under Section 109 of BNS was against the coaccused. Out of 12 prosecution witnesses, no witness has been examined so far. Co-accused of the petitioner has already been granted bail by this

-4Court vide order dated 30.07.2025.

7.

The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court.

8.

This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, the Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of bail on parity. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counted in this case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 27.08.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No