CRA-S-1997-202 IN THE H MANJIT SINGH STATE OF PUNJ 1 The dat 2 The dat 3 The dat website 4 Whethe pronoun pronoun 5 The del judgme CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. R Mr. S **** MANISHA BATR 1. The 14A of the Sched Act (for short “S passed by the Cou arising out of FIR 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH INGH @ SAHIB Versus PUNJAB AND ANOTHER he date when the judgment is reserved he date when the judgment is pronoun he date when the judgment is uploaded ebsite hether only operative part of the judg ronounced or whether the full judgmen ronounced he delay, if any, of the pronouncement dgment and reasons thereof. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Jasraj Singh, Advocate for the ap Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab Mr. Suvir Sidhu, Advocate for the com **** BATRA, J. The instant appeal has been filed b Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tri ort “SC/ST Act”) for setting aside o he Court of Learned Additional Sessio of FIR No.84 dated 15.05.2025 regis JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRA-S-1997-2026 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondents served 10.08.2026 onounced 12.08.2026 loaded on the 12.08.2026 e judgment is dgment is Full cement of full Not applicable ANISHA BATRA appellant Punjab the complainant iled by the appellant under Section ed Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) side of the order dated 18.05.2026 Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur in case registered under Sections 103 and ction ities) 2026 case and AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.12 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1997-202 324(4) of Bharatiy of SC/ST Act at application for gra 2. Brief that the aforement by the complainan from his wife, info had killed his fath body was lying in found the dead bod He further alleged dispute, and praye 3. After initiated. On 15.0 recorded his statem driving the tractor based remarks, he him upto a distan hurled abuses to t factum of his de 3(2)(V) of the SC/ Investigation now 2026 (O&M) 2 haratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for sho Act at Police Station Dasuya, Dist for grant of regular bail as filed by the Brief facts of the case relevant for th ementioned FIR was registered on the plainant on 15.05.2025, alleging there fe, informing him that Manjit Singh @ is father by ramming a tractor into his ing in the field. The complainant imm ad body lying in the field, with blood alleged that the appellant had comm prayed for taking action in the matter. After the registration of the FIR, in n 15.05.2025 itself, Harnek Singh, a statement to the effect that he had se tractor fitted with a leveler, at a high ks, he had hit the motorbike of the v distance of 10-11 Feet, by alightin es to the victim in the name of his c is death, had fled away from the s he SC/ST Act was added. The appella n now stands concluded. or short “BNS”) and Section 3(2)(v) , District Hoshiarpur, whereby an by the appellant had been dismissed. t for the disposal of this petition are on the basis of a statement recorded g therein that he had received a call ingh @ Sahib (the present appellant) nto his motorcycle, and that the dead nt immediately reached the spot and blood oozing from the victim's body. committed the crime due to a land atter. IR, investigation proceedings were ngh, an eye-witness to the incident, had seen the present appellant while a high speed and by uttering caste- the victim Joginder Singh, dragged lighting from the tractor thereafter, f his caste and after confirming the the spot. Offence under Section ppellant was arrested on 26.05.2025. 2)(v) y an n are rded call nt) dead t and ody. land were dent, hile - gged after, g the ction 025. AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.12 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1997-202 4. The a before the Court o dismissed vide ord 5. Feelin petitioner. 6. It is a order is not sustain Additional Session witness to the occ result of after-thou so, Harnek Singh turned hostile sinc other eye-witness conclude. His fu antecedents are cl allowed and the im 7. Per co respondent No.2 petitioner are serio on account of the cannot be extende prosecution versio 2026 (O&M) 3 The appellant had moved an applica ourt of Learned Additional Sessions ide order dated 18.05.2026. Feeling aggrieved the present app It is argued by learned counsel for th sustainable in the eyes of law as while essions Judge, ignored the fact that th he occurrence. Harnek Singh was intr thought. His statement is not at all Singh has already been examined be le since he has not supported the pro itness to the occurrence. The trial w His further incarceration would not s are clean. It is, therefore, argued th the impugned order is liable to be set Per contra, learned State counsel assi No.2-complainant has argued that re serious in nature. The complainant of the fact that the eye-witness has xtended benefit of bail. The same e version by reporting the same to the application for grant of regular bail sions Judge, Hoshiarpur, which was nt appeal has been filed by the l for the appellant that the impugned while passing the same the Learned that the complainant was not an eye- as introduced as an eye-witness as a t at all worthy of any reliance. More ned before the Trial Court and has he prosecution version. There is no trial will take considerable time to ot serve any useful purpose. His ued that the appeal deserves to be be set aside. el assisted by learned counsel for the that the allegations against the lainant is yet to be examined. Only ss has turned hostile, the petitioner ame eye-witness had supported the to the journalist and his recording is bail was the gned rned - as a ore has is no e to . His o be r the the Only ioner d the ng is AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.12 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1997-202 available on You complainant and o no illegality or in Sessions Judge. I allowed. 8. This C for the parties at co 9. The a by using his tracto The tractor of the victim was crushe has not supported the appellant can been examined. appellant. The ap cannot be stated to law that grant of specific facts and parameters set out such as nature of conviction and nat apart, reasonable 2026 (O&M) 4 n YouTube. There are chances of t and other material witnesses, if exte or infirmity in the order as passe dge. It is, therefore, argued that the This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The appellant is alleged to have assau s tractor on the fateful day and to hav of the appellant was recovered from crushed under the same. Only due to t ported the prosecution version, no inf t can be drawn at this stage. The m ned. The allegations prima facie m he apprehension that he may intimida tated to be unfounded at this stage. nt of bail is a discretionary relief to b ts and circumstance of each case and t out for considering the application of accusations, severity of punishm nd nature of evidence in support of ac nable apprehension of tampering wit es of petitioner’s intimidating the if extended benefit of bail. There is passed by the Learned Additional at the appeal does not deserve to be ubmissions made by learned counsel e assaulted the victim Joginder Singh to have caused his homicidal death. from the spot of occurrence as the ue to the reason that the eye-witness no inference as to the innocence of The material witnesses have not yet make out a case as against the timidate the other material witnesses age. It is well-settled proposition of ief to be granted or denied based on e and there cannot be any exhaustive ication for grant of bail. The factors unishment if the accusations entail a rt of accusations are to be seen. That ng with evidence or threatening the the re is ional to be unsel ingh eath. s the tness ce of t yet t the esses n of d on stive ctors tail a That the AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.12 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-1997-202 material witnesses be considered, an considered in the principles and oth compelling ground 10. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 11. Since any, is rendered in 12.08.2026 Amit Sharma 2026 (O&M) 5 nesses is also to be weighed. Frivolity ed, and it is only the element of in the matter of grant of bail. In nd other circumstances as discussed ground to allow this appeal. According It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No olity of prosecution should always nt of genuineness that has to be In light of the foregoing legal cussed above, this Court finds no ordingly, the appeal is dismissed. vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No ways o be legal no y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.12 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.