Jatinder Singh Gill Alias Akshey Kumar v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.221(2) Case No. : CRM-M-30443-2025 Decided On : September 08, 2025 Jatinder Singh Gill @ Akshey Kumar ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Punjab ....
Respondent CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.
* * * Present :
Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. P. S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab.
* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.
:
Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.0017 dated 12.02.2025, under Sections 109, 132, 221, 191(3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at Police Station Division No.1, District Pathankot. Briefly, the aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of statement made by Dr. Akash Chaudhary, who was working at Civil Hospital, Pathankot as a doctor, wherein he stated that on 12.02.2025, at about 12:30 PM, a patient namely Manik Kalsi along with his mother Ranjana Kalsi came to him for getting first aid as Manik Kalsi was having wound on his head. On asking, the doctor was told by Manik Kalsi that one Love and Shammi Pandit's son gave him beatings outside bus stand. Meanwhile, when the doctor was treating the injured, Munish @ Shammi Pandit, his son
(petitioner herein) - both carrying datars in their hand, came there and attacked Manik Kalsi with intention to kill him. Munish @ Shammi Pandit attacked from the front side of datar on the head of Manik Kalsi and when he tried to save himself, the said datar hit his right hand. His mother Ranjana Kalsi also tried to save her son but she was also attacked by Munish @ Shammi Pandit. The said doctor further stated that he got scared and came out of the room but while coming out, he saw one Love with datar in his hand, Akshay Kumar with danda in his hand and one Rohit Kumar carrying baseball with him. He also stated that ASI Gulshan Kumar was trying to stop them, but aforesaid Munish @ Shammi Pandit, his son (petitioner) and Love did not spare him and attacked ASI Gulshan Kumar as well.
Even Sanjeev Kumar, who came to save ASI Gulshan Kumar, was also attacked by Munish @ Shammi Pandit with datar, which hit him on the left side of his head and Love attacked him with his kirtch, which hit Sanjeev Kumar on his right thigh. Then, the petitioner hit him with his datar, which hit him on his arms. On this, Manik Kalsi and Sanjeev Kumar raised alarm and all the assailants ran away with their respective weapons. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case. Though the name of the petitioner finds mention in the FIR, yet he has not been attributed any specific role or injury and it was due to some confusion and misunderstanding that he had been named in the FIR. In fact, he was not even present at the spot.
Even it has been admitted by mother of injured namely Ranjana Kalsi that the petitioner was not present at the spot and his name has been wrongly mentioned in the FIR.
Kalsi, has also been annexed along with the petition. No other criminal case is pending against him. The petitioner is in custody since 12.02.2025. He has further urged that trial of the case is likely to take time. Therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel, per contra, opposed the bail petition while contending that the present case is not case of simple assault. The assailants entered into doctor's duty room, thereby disturbing a public servant to do his duty and also attacked a police official on duty. So, keeping in view serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, he does not deserve the concession of bail.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file.
As per the allegations, no specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner qua person of Manik Kalsi, his mother Ranjana Kalsi and ASI Gulshan Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of the Court towards copy of affidavit of Ranjana Kalsi, which has been placed on record, wherein she had deposed that the accused Akshey Kumar @ Jatinder Singh (the present petitioner) was not present at the spot of occurrence and his name was wrongly mentioned in the FIR and he was innocent. Learned counsel for the petitioner also produced on record the bail order dated 05.08.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pathankot, on the bail applications of Love Kumar and Rohit Kumar - coaccused in the present case. In the said bail order, it has been observed that the allegations against the applicants in those applications i.e. Love Kumar and Rohit Kumar were that they caused injuries to one Sanjeev Kumar and
attacked ASI Gulshan Kumar. However, no MLR of injured Sanjeev Kumar regarding the injuries caused has been placed on record to corroborate the prosecution version. The head injury on the person of injured Manik Kalsi has been attributed to Munish @ Shammi Pandit. As per the Custody Certificate dated 07.09.2025, which has been placed on record today in the Court, the petitioner has already undergone custody period of 06 months and 23 days and no other criminal case was found registered against him. Conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. No useful purpose is likely to be served by further detaining the petitioner behind bars. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.
However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition.
September 08, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.