← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/44460/2025allowed

Sukhwinder Singh @ Shanti v. State Of Punjab

2026-03-25Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal2 pages

CRM-M-44460-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44460-2025 Date of Decision: 25.03.2026 SUKHWINDER SINGH @ SHANTI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. P.K.S.Phoolka, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Pandher, Asst. A.G.Punjab.

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 16 dated 25.02.2023 under Sections 323,506,34,507 of IPC and Section-302 IPC added later on by deleting the offence under Section-307 of IPC of registered at Police Station Balianwali, District Bathinda.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with his co-accused, inflicted an injury on the head of one Sandeep Singh with the reverse side of a 'kasia', which ultimately led to his death during treatment after about three days.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no concern with the alleged occurrence. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2023 and prays for grant of regular bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel 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 RENU RAWAT 2026.03.25 16.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-44460-2025 -2petitioner and the same is taken on record. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 03 years and 18 days and is not involved in any other case and out of 15 cited prosecution witnesses only 5 witnesses have been examined so far.

5.

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

6.

After hearing the rival contentions and considering that the petitioner is in custody for the last 03 years and 18 days; is not involved in any other case; out of 15 cited prosecution witnesses only 5 witnesses have been examined so far and 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.

7.

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.

8.

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

9.

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. 25.03.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No RENU RAWAT 2026.03.25 16.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh