Harinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 01.12.2025 Harinder Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Dhiraj Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Harinder Singh 135 06.08.2025 118(2), 351 of BNS, 2023 Sadar Sangrur Sangrur 2.

As per allegations, petitioner - Harinder Singh, gave a spade blow on left arm of the complainant - Baldev Singh, and such injury was declared grievous.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the alleged offences are triable by the Court of the learned Magistrate and the petitioner cannot be kept behind bars for an indefinite period. It is further submitted that the injury attributed to the petitioner, though opined grievous, is on the non-vital part of the body and has healed within a few days of the incident. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status

- 2 - report dated 29.11.2025 and custody certificate dated 30.11.2025 in Court today. Both are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate places in the case file. Copies thereof have been handed over to learned counsel for the petitioner. 5.

While opposing the prayer for bail, learned State counsel submits that the injury attributed to the petitioner has been declared grievous, therefore, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, he fairly concedes that after completion of investigation challan was presented on 27.08.2025, and thereafter, charges were framed on 09.09.2025. However, out of total 16 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined so far.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7.

It is an admitted position that the injury attributed to the petitioner is grievous in nature but located on a non-vital part of the body of the complainant. All the offences alleged are triable by the Court of learned Magistrate. Further, petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2025, i.e., for about 03 months and 24 days, and despite presentation of challan and framing of charge, not a single prosecution witness has been examined till date, indicating that the trial will take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances, this Court deems it a fit case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in

- 3 - any other case.

8.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

9.

Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

10.

Petition stands disposed of.

Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE December 01, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No