CRM-M-44258- 107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Varinder alias Bittu alias Varindejit Singh State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, DAG Punjab. Ms. Shreya Rana, Advocate for the complainant. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1. Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 302, 341, 148, 149 IPC, Jalandhar Rural. 2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, prosecution verison, Singh had gone to the fields falling on Ladhewali to Rasulpur Road for tilling the fields with tractor. The above said land about 12:45 AM on 02.07.2023, she heard hue and cry. She came out of the house and saw that when her husband came on road on the tractor, accused persons stopped the tractor with their cars. She along with her brother Singh went at the spot on a separate tractor, where they saw that one car without number and another No.PB08-DZ-3453 were parked there. Her husband was sitting on the tractor and -2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Varinder alias Bittu alias Varindejit Singh VERSUS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, DAG Punjab. Ms. Shreya Rana, Advocate for the complainant. -.- Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.60 302, 341, 148, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station . Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, prosecution verison, on 01.07.2023 at about 11:00 P.M, her husband Ku Singh had gone to the fields falling on Ladhewali to Rasulpur Road for tilling the fields with tractor. The above said land is visible from the house of complainant. At about 12:45 AM on 02.07.2023, she heard hue and cry. She came out of the house and saw that when her husband came on road on the tractor, accused persons stopped the tractor with their cars. She along with her brother at the spot on a separate tractor, where they saw that one car without number and another car bearing No.PB33-E 3453 were parked there. Her husband was sitting on the tractor and -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44258-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 06.05.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent RAJESH BHARDWAJ , Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shreya Rana, Advocate for the complainant. Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular 60, dated 02.07.2023, under Section registered at Police Station Nakodar Sadar, District Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Kiranjit Kaur. As per on 01.07.2023 at about 11:00 P.M, her husband Kuljinder Singh had gone to the fields falling on Ladhewali to Rasulpur Road for tilling the is visible from the house of complainant. At about 12:45 AM on 02.07.2023, she heard hue and cry. She came out of the house and saw that when her husband came on road on the tractor, accused persons stopped the tractor with their cars. She along with her brother-in-law Balwinder at the spot on a separate tractor, where they saw that one car without E-2654 and one scooter bearing 3453 were parked there. Her husband was sitting on the tractor and Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular , under Section Sadar, District Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was As per ljinder Singh had gone to the fields falling on Ladhewali to Rasulpur Road for tilling the is visible from the house of complainant. At about 12:45 AM on 02.07.2023, she heard hue and cry. She came out of the house and saw that when her husband came on road on the tractor, accused persons law Balwinder at the spot on a separate tractor, where they saw that one car without 2654 and one scooter bearing 3453 were parked there. Her husband was sitting on the tractor and TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44258- some persons were attacking him with weapons. When she and Balwinder Singh came near the place of occurrence, they saw that ac sword blow on the right thigh of her husband and another blow of sword at the back of his head. Thereafter, they brought him down from the tractor. Accused Vicky gave a datar blow at the backside of the head of her husband and accu Ravinder Singh gave many blows with the reverse side of the datar on his different body parts. Thereafter, her husband fell down on the ground and accused Varinder Singh also gave datar blows on his various body parts. Accused Rajat and Mohit gave kick blows to him. Her brother from the clutches of accused and during this process, accused Gurdeep Singh gave a datar blow on the right hand of Balwinder Singh. Accused Vicky gave a blow with the reverse side of the d Complainant raised alarm and accused persons fled away from the spot on car bearing No.PB33 Thereafter, complainant called her brother Arvinder Singh and Tarsem Singh at the spot and they took injured persons to the hospital. During treatment, her husband succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of above statement, present FIR was registered. During investigation, accused Gurdeep Singh, Vicky, Varinder and Rajat were arrested. During interrogation, accused Rajat suffered a disclosure statement, wherein he disclosed that at the time of occurrence, Rajiv and Manni were also accompanying them and above said persons had also caused injuries to dece statement on 05.07.2023, wherein she stated that due to shock caused by the death of her husband, she did not mention the name of Rajiv and Manni in her initial statement dated 02.07.2023 and at persons had also caused injuries to her husband. Thereafter, Rajiv and co -2025 (O&M) some persons were attacking him with weapons. When she and Balwinder Singh came near the place of occurrence, they saw that ac sword blow on the right thigh of her husband and another blow of sword at the back of his head. Thereafter, they brought him down from the tractor. Accused Vicky gave a datar blow at the backside of the head of her husband and accu Ravinder Singh gave many blows with the reverse side of the datar on his different body parts. Thereafter, her husband fell down on the ground and accused Varinder Singh also gave datar blows on his various body parts. Accused Rajat and Mohit blows to him. Her brother-in-law Balwinder Singh tried to save him from the clutches of accused and during this process, accused Gurdeep Singh gave a datar blow on the right hand of Balwinder Singh. Accused Vicky gave a blow with the reverse side of the datar, which hit on the left arm of Balwinder Singh. Complainant raised alarm and accused persons fled away from the spot on car No.PB33-E-2654 and Activa Scooter bearing No.PB08 Thereafter, complainant called her brother Arvinder Singh and Tarsem Singh at the spot and they took injured persons to the hospital. During treatment, her husband succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of above statement, present FIR was registered. During investigation, accused Gurdeep Singh, Vicky, Varinder and Rajat were arrested. During interrogation, accused Rajat suffered a disclosure statement, wherein he disclosed that at the time of occurrence, Rajiv and Manni were also accompanying them and above said persons had also caused injuries to deceased. Complainant Kiranjit Kaur also suffered a supplementary statement on 05.07.2023, wherein she stated that due to shock caused by the death of her husband, she did not mention the name of Rajiv and Manni in her initial statement dated 02.07.2023 and at the time of occurrence in question, above persons had also caused injuries to her husband. Thereafter, Rajiv and co -2- some persons were attacking him with weapons. When she and Balwinder Singh came near the place of occurrence, they saw that accused Gurdeep Singh gave sword blow on the right thigh of her husband and another blow of sword at the back of his head. Thereafter, they brought him down from the tractor. Accused Vicky gave a datar blow at the backside of the head of her husband and accu Ravinder Singh gave many blows with the reverse side of the datar on his different body parts. Thereafter, her husband fell down on the ground and accused Varinder Singh also gave datar blows on his various body parts. Accused Rajat and Mohit law Balwinder Singh tried to save him from the clutches of accused and during this process, accused Gurdeep Singh gave a datar blow on the right hand of Balwinder Singh. Accused Vicky gave a blow atar, which hit on the left arm of Balwinder Singh. Complainant raised alarm and accused persons fled away from the spot on car 2654 and Activa Scooter bearing No.PB08-DZ-3453. Thereafter, complainant called her brother Arvinder Singh and father-in-law Tarsem Singh at the spot and they took injured persons to the hospital. During treatment, her husband succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of above statement, present FIR was registered. During investigation, accused Gurdeep Singh, Vicky, Varinder and Rajat were arrested. During interrogation, accused Rajat suffered a disclosure statement, wherein he disclosed that at the time of occurrence, Rajiv and Manni were also accompanying them and above said persons had also caused ased. Complainant Kiranjit Kaur also suffered a supplementary statement on 05.07.2023, wherein she stated that due to shock caused by the death of her husband, she did not mention the name of Rajiv and Manni in her initial the time of occurrence in question, above persons had also caused injuries to her husband. Thereafter, Rajiv and co-accused some persons were attacking him with weapons. When she and Balwinder Singh cused Gurdeep Singh gave sword blow on the right thigh of her husband and another blow of sword at the back of his head. Thereafter, they brought him down from the tractor. Accused Vicky gave a datar blow at the backside of the head of her husband and accused Ravinder Singh gave many blows with the reverse side of the datar on his different body parts. Thereafter, her husband fell down on the ground and accused Varinder Singh also gave datar blows on his various body parts. Accused Rajat and Mohit law Balwinder Singh tried to save him from the clutches of accused and during this process, accused Gurdeep Singh gave a datar blow on the right hand of Balwinder Singh. Accused Vicky gave a blow atar, which hit on the left arm of Balwinder Singh. Complainant raised alarm and accused persons fled away from the spot on car 3453. law Tarsem Singh at the spot and they took injured persons to the hospital. During treatment, her husband succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of above statement, present FIR was registered. During investigation, accused Gurdeep Singh, Vicky, Varinder and Rajat were arrested. During interrogation, accused Rajat suffered a disclosure statement, wherein he disclosed that at the time of occurrence, Rajiv and Manni were also accompanying them and above said persons had also caused ased. Complainant Kiranjit Kaur also suffered a supplementary statement on 05.07.2023, wherein she stated that due to shock caused by the death of her husband, she did not mention the name of Rajiv and Manni in her initial the time of occurrence in question, above accused TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44258- Manni were nominated in this FIR through DDR No.19 dated 05.07.2023. present petitioner was arrested on 02.07.2023. of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, declined the bail appl the petitioner vide order dated 07.11.2023. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM of regular bail, however, the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order da 15.12.2023. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present second petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. alleged occurrence had taken place in the interevening night of 1/2.07.2023. He contends that the case of the prosecution is based on the FIR lodged by the wife of the deceased i.e. Kiranjit Kaur allegations made by Thereafter, the petitioner has also been alleged to have deceased. He has submi apparent that there are only five injuries and there is no corresponding injury suffered by the deceased as alleged ocular version of the prosecution i arguments, learned counsel contends that co been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 (2) Cr.P.C. antecedents as he has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since -2025 (O&M) Manni were nominated in this FIR through DDR No.19 dated 05.07.2023. present petitioner was arrested on 02.07.2023. The petitio of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, declined the bail appl the petitioner vide order dated 07.11.2023. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM-M of regular bail, however, the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order da 15.12.2023. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present second petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. alleged occurrence had taken place in the interevening night of 1/2.07.2023. He contends that the case of the prosecution is based on the FIR lodged by the wife of ceased i.e. Kiranjit Kaur. She stands projected as eye allegations made by her, the main accused are Gurdeep Singh and Vicky. Thereafter, the petitioner has also been alleged to have He has submitted that from the perusal of the apparent that there are only five injuries and there is no corresponding injury suffered by the deceased as alleged by the complainant. It is submitted that the ocular version of the prosecution is not medically corroborated. To butteress his arguments, learned counsel contends that co-accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 (2) Cr.P.C. He has submitted that the antecedents as he has never been prosecuted in any other criminal case. He has that the petitioner is behind bars since -3- Manni were nominated in this FIR through DDR No.19 dated 05.07.2023. The The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 07.11.2023. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier M-62187-2023 praying for the grant of regular bail, however, the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order da 15.12.2023. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present second petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the alleged occurrence had taken place in the interevening night of 1/2.07.2023. He contends that the case of the prosecution is based on the FIR lodged by the wife of . She stands projected as eye-witness and as per the , the main accused are Gurdeep Singh and Vicky. Thereafter, the petitioner has also been alleged to have given a kirpan blow to the perusal of the post-mortem report, it is apparent that there are only five injuries and there is no corresponding injury by the complainant. It is submitted that the s not medically corroborated. To butteress his accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under He has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal never been prosecuted in any other criminal case. He has that the petitioner is behind bars since 02.07.2023. He has submitted that The ner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the ication filed by the petitioner vide order dated 07.11.2023. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier 2023 praying for the grant of regular bail, however, the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 15.12.2023. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the It is contended that the alleged occurrence had taken place in the interevening night of 1/2.07.2023. He contends that the case of the prosecution is based on the FIR lodged by the wife of witness and as per the , the main accused are Gurdeep Singh and Vicky. a kirpan blow to the mortem report, it is apparent that there are only five injuries and there is no corresponding injury by the complainant. It is submitted that the s not medically corroborated. To butteress his accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under petitioner has no criminal never been prosecuted in any other criminal case. He has He has submitted that TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44258- in the overall facts granted regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that petitioner is not only specifically named in the FIR but he along with co has caused injuries to the deceased, which resulted into the death of the husband of the complainant. prosecution is duly substantiated by the the wife of the deceased prosecution witnesses, conducted. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on 5. Heard. 6. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that witness, who is the wife of deceased. The petitioner is alleged to be the part of unlawful assembly and given a kirpan blow to the deceased shows that the five injuries were suffered by the deceased. It has been contended that the ocular version is not medically corroborated. would show that and 29 days as on in any other case. accused. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhattacharya @ Asim Harinath Bhattacharya @ Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. National Investigation Agency, 2022(1) SCC 695 -2025 (O&M) in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitione granted regular bail. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that petitioner is not only specifically named in the FIR but he along with co has caused injuries to the deceased, which resulted into the death of the husband of the complainant. Learned State counsel further submits that the case of the prosecution is duly substantiated by the complainant/ fe of the deceased. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total rosecution witnesses, the examination-in-chief of three witnesses ha . He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. Heard. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is that the case of the prosecution is based on the , who is the wife of deceased. The petitioner is alleged to be the part of wful assembly and given a kirpan blow to the deceased shows that the five injuries were suffered by the deceased. It has been contended that the ocular version is not medically corroborated. would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 0 days as on 05.05.2026. It further reflects that in any other case. Needles to say speedy trial is a fundamental right of every The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashim @ Asim Kumar Haranath Bhattacharya @ Asim Harinath Bhattacharya @ Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. National Investigation Agency, 2022(1) SCC 695 -4- and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that petitioner is not only specifically named in the FIR but he along with co-accused has caused injuries to the deceased, which resulted into the death of the husband of Learned State counsel further submits that the case of the complainant/eye-witness, who is herself is instructions, has submitted that out of total chief of three witnesses has been . He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is the case of the prosecution is based on the complainant/eye , who is the wife of deceased. The petitioner is alleged to be the part of wful assembly and given a kirpan blow to the deceased. Post-mortem report shows that the five injuries were suffered by the deceased. It has been contended that the ocular version is not medically corroborated. Custody certificate produced incarceration of 02 years, 09 months . It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved speedy trial is a fundamental right of every Ashim @ Asim Kumar Haranath Bhattacharya @ Asim Harinath Bhattacharya @ Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. National Investigation Agency, 2022(1) SCC 695 has held as under: r deserves to be Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the used has caused injuries to the deceased, which resulted into the death of the husband of Learned State counsel further submits that the case of the , who is herself is instructions, has submitted that out of total 29 been . He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is eye- , who is the wife of deceased. The petitioner is alleged to be the part of report shows that the five injuries were suffered by the deceased. It has been contended Custody certificate produced , 09 months the petitioner is not involved speedy trial is a fundamental right of every Ashim @ Asim Kumar Haranath Bhattacharya @ Asim Harinath Bhattacharya @ Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44258- “ not consistent with Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While deprivation of personal liberty for some period may not be avoidable, period of deprivation pending trial/appeal cannot be unduly long. At the same time, timely human rights and denial of speedy justice is a threat to public confidence in the administration of justice.” 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent decision dated 03.07.2024 in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Ma of 2024, has held that howsoever serious a crime may be, an accused has the right to speedy trial under the Constitution of India. 9. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the parties before the trial anything on the merits of the case. time. Keeping in view the ar record coupled with the fact that co to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 (2) Cr.P.C, this Court is of the opinion th succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to of the concerned trial 11. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the cases. May 06, 2025 tripti Whether speaking/non -2025 (O&M) “Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy tr not consistent with Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While deprivation of personal liberty for some period may not be avoidable, period of deprivation pending trial/appeal cannot be unduly long. At the same time, timely human rights and denial of speedy justice is a threat to public confidence in the administration of justice.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent decision dated 03.07.2024 in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 2787 , has held that howsoever serious a crime may be, an accused has the right to speedy trial under the Constitution of India. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the record coupled with the fact that co-accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the of the cases. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking -5- Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial is not consistent with Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While deprivation of personal liberty for some period may not be avoidable, period of deprivation pending trial/appeal cannot be unduly long. At the same time, timely delivery of justice is part of human rights and denial of speedy justice is a threat to public confidence in the administration of justice.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent decision dated 03.07.2024 in harashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 2787 , has held that howsoever serious a crime may be, an accused has the right The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting The trial of the case will take sufficient long by both the sides and perusing the accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 at learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE speaking : Speaking ial is not consistent with Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While deprivation of personal liberty for some period may not be avoidable, period of deprivation pending trial/appeal cannot be delivery of justice is part of human rights and denial of speedy justice is a threat to public The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent decision dated 03.07.2024 in harashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 2787 , has held that howsoever serious a crime may be, an accused has the right The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting The trial of the case will take sufficient long sides and perusing the accused Gurdeep Singh, who had been alleged to have given the main injuries, has already been granted bail under Sections 167 for the petitioner Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is the satisfaction Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-44258- Whether reportable -2025 (O&M) Whether reportable : Yes/No -6- : Yes/No TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document