Satnam Singh Alias Satta v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH (110) CRM-M-59700-2025 Date of Decision: 07.03.2026 SATNAM SINGH ALIAS SATTA ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH
Present:
Ms. Meena, Advocate for Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Yadwinder Singh, AAG, Punjab.
**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL) 1.
The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 483 of BNSS has been invoked for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 13 dated 22.02.2016 under Section 376 IPC (lateron converted to offence under Section 376-D of IPC), registered at Police Station Harike, District Tarn Taran.
2.
The translated version of the FIR is reproduced below:- "Police Station Harike District Tarn Taran, Copy of Rapat No. 20 dated 13.02.2016, L/SI Daljit Kaur 3022 Tarn Taran and it is registered in the DDR at 3.20 PM, stated that I L/SI along with other police officials were present at special Naka Bandi at Bus stop Marhana that xxxx daughter of Jaswant Singh caste Jatt resident of Ratta Gudda aged about 19 years was obtain and details of the statement are: That I am resident of above mentioned address and doing household work and I have studied up to 3rd class only from Village School. We are three brother sister my elder brother Gursewak Singh is the eldest and he is married, younger to him is Raj Singh and I am the youngest. Yesterday night i.e. 12.02.
2016 the whole family after having dinner slept there in respective rooms where I am along with my brother and his wife and Prince my brother's brother-in-law who had come to visit us slept in one room. That around 10.
near the wall of courtyard and both had wrapped blankets around them. On seeing me, Balwant Singh Gagged my face with his hands and both dragged me towards the road and one unidentified person with a muffled face with a motorcycle but I could not identify him. All the three persons took me to the tubewell on their motorcycle and these three persons committed rape with me turn by turn. And dropped me back in the village on the same motorcycle and after reaching my home I told everything to my Chacha Nachhatar Singh and Chachi xxxx and today I along with my father Jaswant Singh and my Chachi xxxx were going to inform you that you met us on the way. They have done injustice to me, action be taken against them. LTI Jaswant Singh. Sd/- Gurpreet Kaur. Attested Sd/- Baljeet Kaur L/SI, I/C women cell, Patti."
3.
Status report by way of affidavit of PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Detective), District Tarn Taran, Additional Charge Sub-Division Patti, District Tarn Taran has been filed by the State, which is taken on record. A copy thereof has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, aged 31 years, has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of the statement of the prosecutrix, alleging commission of rape upon her by the petitioner along with other co-accused. It is contended that the petitioner was earlier granted regular bail in CRM-M-761-2017 vide order dated 24.01.2017; however, due to his non-appearance which was neither wilful nor intentional, he was subsequently declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 25.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused, namely Surjit Singh and Balwant Singh, have already been acquitted of the charges levelled against them vide judgment dated 06.04.
2024 passed by the learned ASJ, Tarn Taran in SC-73-2016, whereas the petitioner could not be considered for acquittal as he had been declared a proclaimed person. It is also argued that in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix named only coaccused Jeeta Singh, Balwant Singh and one unknown person, and did not name the petitioner.
substantiate the allegations against the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the 31 year old petitioner has already undergone an actual custody of 02 years 03 months and 10 days and has clean antecedents. 5.
Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He states that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. He has filed custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 02 years 03 months and 10 days. The learned State counsel, on instructions from official concerned, submits that in the present case, charges were framed on 06.03.2025 and out of total 16 prosecution witnesses, 10 have been examined till date. He submits that in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 6.
Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
7.
!
"
#
$
!
!
"
#
%&
'&(& & )
)'
#
* & +
& +
02 years 03 months and 10 days& ,
& -
. & /
#
#
0
1 )& -
#
#
#
* & +
0
*
1
0
#
1 +
2
)
, #
& +
#
3
1
* 4
4
"
!
" #
$
))& 2
#
1
.
.
5
56
1
#
$ 78 +
#
& 78 +
#
9 5
#
8& 78 +
#
*
*
& 7 +
#
#
& +
0
.
%
) & ,
& )(& ,
1
*
):& -
7 8
(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE March 07, 2026 Ritika Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No