Harchand Singh @ Sonu @ Billa v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102+218 Date of Decision: 22.09.2025 HARCHAND SINGH @ SONU @ BILLA ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Robin Singh Bhullar, Advocate and Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) CRM-38420-2025 This application has been filed for placing on record a copy of compromise dated 09.09.2025 as Annexure P-3 and exemption from filing the certified as well as true typed copies of the same. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and compromise dated 09.09.2025 is ordered to be taken on record. Main case:

1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in case FIR No. 180 dated 13.11.2023 under Sections 323,324,506,307,148,149 IPC and Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Division-A, Amritsar.

-22.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other co-accused have constituted an unlawful assembly and have attacked the complainant. It is alleged that the petitioner has fired three gun shots, out of which one gun shot hit on the back side of the right thigh of the complainant. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has never met the complainant or any of the co-accused before the registration of this FIR. He further submits that compromise ( Annexure P-3) has been effected between the parties.

4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate dated 20.09.2025 of the petitioner in the Court today and the same is taken on record. As per which, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 years 09 months and 30 days. 5.

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

6.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than 01 years 09 months and 30 days; the trial is yet to commence and moreover, the compromise has been has been effected between the parties, therefore, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

-37.

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 bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

8.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the applicant is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) 22.09.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No