CRM-M-49761- IN THE H (111-1) KARAN KUMAR STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. S MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Section 307 added later on and Kotwali, Bathinda 2. The statement got re 08.08.2023 allegin wife of victim La -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH
C UMAR @ MOTA Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS P.K.S. Phoolka, Advocate for the Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case arising out of FIR No.14 307, 324, 325, 323, 148 and 149 on and Section 307 and 325 of IPC del thinda. The aforementioned FIR was reg ot recorded by the complainant J alleging that the accused Sahil Khan tim Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha @ B JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-49761-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 26.02.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA
for the petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 145 dated 08.08.2023 registered d 149 of IPC (Section 302 of IPC PC deleted later on) at Police Station registered on the basis of the ant Jashan Chahil @ Jashan on Khan was having an evil eye on the a @ Brown Gill and several times, 2026 oner
dent
ction grant tered IPC ation the on n the mes, AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49761- altercations had ta Sahil in this conte victim and on his companions had g motorbike of the they were present Aman @ Jashni, (P) (name withhel persons reached accused Sahil Kha should not be spar attack upon the v their respective w inflicted by the pe he was lying down Satkar Singh, Bitt sustained injuries raised by the vic assailants fled fro under Sections 30 registered. The a arrested. Accuse -2025 (O&M) 2 had taken place between the victim L context. On 07.08.2023, the accused on his asking, the complainant alongw had gone to Hira Chowk, Bathinda on f the victim and Channi respectivel resent at the spot, the accused Sahil shni, Bittal @ Aman, Child-in-Confl ithheld), Karan @ Mota i.e. the prese ched there, armed with weapons an il Khan made an exhortation by sayin e spared and then the petitioner, accus the victim Lakhwinder Singh @ La tive weapons. Lakhwinder Singh ha the petitioner and other co-accused on g down. The complainant rushed for h h, Bittal @ Aman and CCL (P) stru juries on his head at the hands of t he victim and complainant attracted ed from the spot. They were admitte 307, 323, 324, 325 and 148 read The accused Satkar Singh @ Sam, C ccused Sahil Khan suffered disclo ctim Lakhwinder Singh and accused ccused Sahil gave a challenge to the alongwith the victim and some other nda on the Activa vehicle and Bullet ctively. At about 08:45 PM, when Sahil Khan, Sam @ Satkar Singh, Conflict with Law (for short CCL) present petitioner and 3-4 unknown ons and raising exhortation. The saying that complainant and others , accused Sahil and others opened an @ Lakha by causing injuries with gh had fallen down. Injuries were sed on the person of the victim while d for his rescue but accused Sam @ struck blows on him and he too s of the co-accused. The clamour tracted other persons and then the dmitted to hospital. Initially a case read with Section 149 of IPC was am, CCL (P) and Sahil Khan were disclosure statement admitting his used o the other ullet hen ingh, CL) own The thers d an with were hile m @ too mour the case was were his AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49761- involvement in the in causing injuries 3. As pe on 16.08.2023. petitioner who wa of this case and wa statement admittin bat used by him. now stands conclu 4. It is a falsely implicated attributed to him. bail. On parity, custody since lon further incarcerati argued that the pet 5. Per c and specific alleg FIR but specific w alongwith the co participant of the Lakhwinder Singh -2025 (O&M) 3 t in the crime and got recovered one h njuries to the victim. As per the further allegations, the vic 23. Offence under Section 302 of ho was in custody in some other case and was formally arrested on 12.10.20 mitting his involvement in the crime a him. Other co-accused were subseq concluded. It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case. No specific o him. The CCL (P) and CCL (O), arity, he too deserves to be extended ce long. The trial will take conside eration would not serve any fruitf the petition deserve to be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel has allegations against the petitioner wh cific weapon used in the offence had he co-accused had formed an unlawfu of the said unlawful assembly lead Singh and sustaining of injuries by t one hand-pump handle used by him the victim succumbed to the injuries 302 of IPC was also added. The er case was joined into investigation .10.2023. He too suffered disclosure rime and got recovered one baseball subsequently arrested. Investigation l for the petitioner that he has been cific overt act or injury has been , have been extended benefit of tended the same benefit. He is in onsiderable time to conclude. His fruitful purpose. It is, therefore, sel has argued that there are serious who was not only named in the had been attributed to him. He nlawful assembly and was an active ly leading to death of the victim s by the complainant. The trial has him uries The ation sure eball ation been been fit of is in His fore, rious n the He ctive ictim l has AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49761- commenced and t delay in conclusio the co-accused chances of his abs bail. It is, therefor 6. This considerable lengt 7. The with the co-accuse have voluntarily c victim thereby ca injuries to the com with the aid of Sec that there must be by any member o assembly or eithe committed. The al in the occurrence committed in pro petitioner are serio heinous crime pun length of incarcera -2025 (O&M) 4 and there is no material to show th clusion of the same. His antecedents sed was seen in the CCTV footage his absconding or intimidating the wi erefore, argued that the petition does n This Court has heard the rival subm e length. The petitioner by forming members accused and in prosecution of commo arily caused simple as well as grievou by causing homicidal death of the v he complainant. The petitioner has be of Section 149 of IPC. The essential ust be an unlawful assembly and offen ber of the assembly in prosecution either of the member must know tha The allegations prima facie show his c rence while having knowledge that in prosecution of common object. e serious in nature as he along with c e punishable with capital punishmen carceration is a factor that weighs with ow that there would be any undue edents are not clean. He alongwith ootage of the incident. There are the witnesses, if extended benefit of does not deserve to be allowed. submissions made by the parties at mbership of an unlawful assembly common object thereof, is alleged to rievous injuries on the person of the f the victim Lakhwinder Singh and has been linked to the acts attributed sential ingredients of this offence are d offence must have been committed ution of the common object of the ow that such offence is likely to be w his clear involvement/participation that such offences were likely to be ject. The allegations against the with co-accused stands accused of a shment or life imprisonment. While s with the Court in considering bail, ndue with are fit of es at mbly ed to f the and uted e are itted f the to be ation to be t the of a hile bail, AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49761- it cannot overshad 302 IPC. The pr mainly on the gro law is that mere p take time by itself grounds for enlarg Reference in thi Kumar Saxena V Yadav Vs. State of Amaramani Tripa proposition of law denied based on sp any exhaustive pa bail. The factors accusations entail are to be seen. Th or threatening th prosecution shoul genuineness that h petitioner is not en by him in custody of sentence for w circumstances of -2025 (O&M) 5 ershadow the seriousness of the accus The present petition has been filed b he ground of his prolonged custody. T ere prolonged period of custody or th itself or coupled with the period of i enlarging an accused on bail, when n this context can be had to the o na Vs. UOI, 2008(63) ACC (SC) te of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC, 2 Tripathi, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 2 of law that grant of bail is a discret d on specific facts and circumstance of tive parameters set out for considerin ctors such as nature of accusations, entail a conviction and nature of evid en. That apart, reasonable apprehensio the material witnesses is also t should always be considered, and that has to be considered in the matte not entitled to be released on bail only ustody. Keeping in view the gravity o for which the conviction may entai es of the case but without meaning t accusation of murder under Section filed by the petitioner seeking bail tody. The well settled proposition of y or the fact that the trial is likely to od of incarceration are not sufficient when the offence alleged is serious. the observations made in Parmod (SC), Chenna Boyanna Krishna C, 242 and State through CBI Vs. al) 280(SC). It is also well-settled discretionary relief to be granted or nce of each case and there cannot be sidering the application for grant of tions, severity of punishment if the f evidence in support of accusations hension of tampering with evidence also to be weighed. Frivolity of d, and it is only the element of matter of grant of bail. As such, the il only on the ground of period spent avity of the allegations, the quantum entail and the attendant facts and aning to make any comment on the ction bail n of ly to cient ious. od na Vs. ttled d or ot be of f the tions ence y of t of , the spent ntum and n the AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49761- merits thereof, I a to be allowed. Ac 8. Since any, is rendered in 26.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 6 of, I am of the considered opinion tha d. Accordingly, the same is dismissed Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
on that the petition does not deserve missed. en dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
Yes/No
serve n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.