Hardeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M No.70465 of 2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.70465 of 2025 Date of decision : 29.1.2026 Date of uploading : 29.1.2026 Hardeep Singh .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. G.S. Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.117 dated 24.9.2025 under Sections 115(2), 194(2), 191(3), 190 and 324(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 109 and 118 of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana. 2.

The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:- 'Chief Officer Police Station Kum Kalan, District Ludhiana, Jai Hind, on 22-92025, an information was received at the Katani Kalan police post vide ruqqa no. CR-1000/25 that Jagdeep Singh alias Jaggi son of Manjit Singh resident of Katani Kalan has entered Arora Neuro Center Mall Road Ludhiana due to a fight, on which on 23-09-2025, then I SI reached Arora Neuro Center, Mall Road Ludhiana and obtained a written opinion from the doctor to obtain the statement

CRM-M No.70465 of 2025 -2of the accused, on which the doctor told that the injured is fit to make statement, but the accused Jagdeep Singh alias Jaggi was in a semi-conscious conditions due to taking medicines. Due to which his statement could not be obtained. Who had told that our fight took place at Prince Dhaba Chandigarh Road, Katani Kalan with Hardeep Singh son of Balvir Singh etc. Regarding this incident, then I SI along with HC Hardeep Singh No. 3088 and PHG Gurmeet Singh No. 29089 reached to the spot and investigated. On the basis of the investigation an secrete information received, it was found that on the night of 21-09-2025 at around 9-00 PM, Jagdeep Singh alias Jaggi son of Manjit Singh, resident of Katani Kalan etc.

and Hardeep Singh son of Balvir Singh and Sukhi resident of Katani Kalan, Satta and Bira who are both brothers are resident of village Chandra and 4/5 other unidentified persons The individuals openly and in public places have clashed, armed with deadly weapons, attacked each other, and vandalized vehicles. The above mentioned persons have openly and armed with deadly weapons and have rioted, disturbed the peace and quiet of the people and have attacked each other. By doing so, they are found guilty of the crime of offence u/s 115(2), 194(2), 191(3), 190, 324(4)-BNS.

Therefore, a case has been registered against the accused, Jagdeep Singh alias Jaggi, son of Manjit Singh, resident of Katani Kalan, Hardeep Singh, son of Balvir Singh and Sukhi, residents of Katani Kalan, Satta and Bira, residents of village Chandara and 4/5 other unknown persons, for the above crime. The case be registered and the case number should be informed. After obtaining the medical records and statements of the remaining two parties, the action will be taken. The investigation is being carried out with the help of other officially by me Sd/-/- Swaran Chand ASI/829 area opposite Prince Dhaba Chandigarh Road Katani Kalan, Ludhiana, Time-5.30 PM.' 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 27.9.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that the case in hand is one of version and cross-version and it is yet to be determined as to who is the aggressor. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man aged 29 years with no criminal antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the

CRM-M No.70465 of 2025 -3petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 28.1.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.

5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 27.9.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out and challan stands presented on 24.12.2025. Total 12 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is not in dispute that charges are yet to be framed. It is thus indubitable that culmination of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1 As per custody certificate dated 28.1.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 3 months and 30 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However,

CRM-M No.70465 of 2025 -4in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 29.1.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No