← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/61805/2025allowed

Nishan Singh v. State Of Punjab

2025-12-15Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary3 pages

 CRM-M-61805-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-61805-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.12.2025 Nishan Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

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

Ms. Komal Preet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner   

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

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case GD No.21 dated 25.12.2024, registered under Sections 109, 125, 194(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNS (Sections 118(1) and 118(2) BNS added later on) in FIR No.281 dated 23.12.2024, under Sections 109, 125, 194(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act at Police Station Sadar, District Amritsar. 2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for more than 5 months. He alleges false implication. Even otherwise, he has been named in the cross-version registered through GD dated 25.12.2024, while no specific injury has been attributed to him, though he is shown to be armed with a Khanda. The FIR regarding the same incident was also lodged at the hands of the petitioner-party. Co-accused namely Kulwant Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2025, Annexure P-7, while co-accused Raja Singh @ Raja granted regular bail vide order dated 31.07.2025, Annexure P-7. Charges have been framed on 19.11.2025, however,

 CRM-M-61805-2025 (O&M) 2 out of 17 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined. The petitioner is not involved in any other case.

3.

The custody certificate filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 5 months and 14 days.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner to be a part of unlawful assembly, wherein injuries were inflicted. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage, co-accused having been granted bail and the petitioner being not involved in any other case. 5.

Heard.

6.

                       !"#$ $   # %

 #

   !&!!'(' 

$ $  

  !)     * *           $ $  

   '!  

+   7.

The petitioner 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 petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

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

 CRM-M-61805-2025 (O&M) 3 (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner 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 petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his 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, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner 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 petitioner.

8.

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 petitioner by this order.

9.

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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 15.12.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No