Kallu Alias Jagraj Singh v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M-34260 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34260 of 2025 Date of decision: 09.07.2025 Kallu @ Jagraj Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present :
Mr. Ankush Rampal, 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.74 dated 13.04.2022, under Sections 323, 324, 307, 341, 148, 149 IPC 1860 registered at Police Station Lambi District Sri Muktsar Sahib.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that petitioner along with coaccused have caused injuries to the complainant. The injuries attributed to the present petitioner is of kirch blow on the legs of the complainant. The said injuries are simple in nature. However, it is stated that similarly placed coaccused have also been granted the concession of bail by this Court. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that challan has been presented and charges are yet to be framed. He further submits that petitioner is in custody for the last 3 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.
CRM-M-34260 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. However, he has vehemently opposed for granting concession of regular bail to the petitioner. As per custody certificate dated 07.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 03 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 the charges are yet to be framed, 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