← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/56141/2025allowed

Amandeep Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab

2025-11-19Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary3 pages

 CRM-M-56141-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-56141-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.11.2025 Amandeep Singh and Another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

Kartik ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioners   

   ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

These petitions are disposed of by this common order as they arise out of same FIR.

2.

Prayer in the present petitions filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.0128 dated 14.08.2025, registered under Sections 304, 111 and 3(5) of BNS (offence under Section 238 BNS added subsequently) at Police Station Khuian Sarwar, District Fazilka. 3.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioners, aged 20, 22 and 30 years old, have been in custody for 3 months. There is a delay of 3 days in lodging the FIR. He alleges false implication as there was a money dispute amongst them and the complainant and the compromise between them did not materalise, thus, he lodged the FIR. There is no MLR also, though the allegations of beaten the complainant have been levelled as also there is nothing to connect them with the alleged incident. Challan was presented on 18.10.2025, however, charges have not

 CRM-M-56141-2025 (O&M) 2 been framed and in all there are 19 prosecution witnesses. The petitioners are not involved in any other case.

4.

The custody certificates dated 18.11.2025, filed by the learned State counsel are taken on record. As per the same, the petitioners are behind bars for 3 months.

5.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioners by the complainant of snatching Rs.20,000/- from him as also beating him up. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner not being involved in any other case.

6.

Heard.

7.

                       !" "  !

 #$#%&%&' "

               #(             )     )  

         " "  

   &#   *    8.

The petitioners is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioners will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioners will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioners will appear before the trial Court on each

 CRM-M-56141-2025 (O&M) 3 and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, they are accused, or for commission of which they are suspected of.

(v) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioners shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioners shall furnish their address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, they seek to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioners shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioners.

9.

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioners by this order.

10.

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.

11.

             (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 19.11.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No