Satnam Singh v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M-34165 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34165 of 2025 Date of decision: 09.07.2025 Satnam Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present :
Mr. Raman Mohinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab.
****
, J. (Oral) 1.
The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in case FIR No.33 dated 06.05.2024, under Sections 326, 452, 324, 323, 34 IPC 1860 registered at Police Station City Zira, District Ferozepur. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that petitioner has caused injuries to the complainant with a kappa hitting firstly on the head near left ear and second blow hit on left side of his forehead above eye and third blow hit on palmer aspect of left hand caused grievous injuries attracting offence under Section 326 IPC. However, it is also stated that wife of the present petitioner was residing with the complainant which was main reason of the dispute. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not involved in any other case. As per custody certificate, petitioner has undergone 7 months and 16 days. Trial is likely to take time for its conclusion and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, petitioner be released on regular bail. 4.
Notice of motion.
ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.14 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-34165 of 2025 5.
Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 08.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 07 months and 16 days.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7.
In view of the above submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the custody period undergone by the petitioner and the fact that he is not involved in any other case; trial is likely to take a long time, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.
8.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
9.
However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.
( )
09.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.14 09:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document