Rupinder Singh Alias Pappu v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-41792-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.09.2025 Rupinder Singh @ Pappu
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Present:
Mr. A.S.Barnala, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Shukla, Sr.DAG, Punjab.
*** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.102 dated 20.05.2025 registered under Sections 108 and 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa.
2.
Brief facts of the prosecution are that the FIR was lodged on the statement of Karamjit Kaur-complainant, who had stated that there was an old dispute over agricultural land between her husband and his uncles/cousins, which was settled with the intervention of Panchayat. However, on 19.05.2025 petitioner-accused and few more persons started raising vatts in the fields without any demarcation. The complainant accompanied by her husband Harjiwan Singh (since deceased) and their daughter reached the fields, where her family was teased. Upon this, her
-2husband felt humiliated and ran towards motor room, where he consumed insecticide. He expired while on the way to hospital. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said offence. He contends that the petitioner is only alleged to have been present at the spot with kahi (an agriculture tool) in his hand, while the demarcation work was being carried out in the presence of Members of Panchayat. The basic ingredients of the offence of 'abetment to suicide' are missing in the present case. The petitioner is behind the bars since 27.05.2025. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. The investigation in the case is complete and final report under Section 193 BNSS has since been submitted.
Further, coaccused Hardeep Singh @ Gaggu, also named in the FIR, has been granted the concession of regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-39690-2025. He further submits that the trial will take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.
4.
Notice of motion.
5.
Learned State counsel, who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. However, he has not controverted the fact that petitioner is not involved in any other case.
-36.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 31⁄2 months; investigation is complete; challan stands presented, and the fact that trial may take a long time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in further custody. Keeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future would be violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
7.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned. It is clarified that nothing stated herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) 11.09.2025 JUDGE 'gian'
Whether Speaking / Reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No