← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/25769/2026allowed

Lovepreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

2026-05-12Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 12.05.2026 LOVEPREET SINGH ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Yaseen Sethi, Advocate with Ms. Akshita Nanda, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under section 483 B.N.S.S (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for the release of the Petitioner on regular bail during the pendency of the trial in FIR No.155 dated 08.07.2025 (P-1) under Sections 309(6) (394 IPC) (later on deleted) and 3(5) of BNS (34 IPC) and lateron on 17.11.2025 charges were framed under Sections 310(2), 311, of BNS read with 317(2), 3(5) of BNS (395, 397, 411, 34 IPC) registered at Police Station, Division No.6, District Ludhiana.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with his co-accused, inflicted injuries upon the complainant and his companion by using a sword, a bicycle and its handle. It is further alleged that petitioner and his co-accused had forcibly robbed the complainant and his brother-in-law of their motorcycle, mobile phones, wallets, Aadhaar card and an amount of ₹15,000/-.

-23..

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has no connection with the alleged incident, as the FIR was lodged against unknown persons. He further submits that the co-accused have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 16.04.2026 in CRM-M-19042-2026. The petitioner is in custody since 22.07.2025. He prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Rohit Hans, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which are taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 09 months and 15 days and is not involved in any other case.

6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 09 months and 15 days; the petitioner is not involved in any other case coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

-38.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 12.05.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No