IN THE 124 Jiwan Singh State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 302, 120 Sadar Budhlada, 2. Learned that the case set was in a relationship Singh is stated to Amandeep Kaur, and caused his Amandeep Kaur bail. It is further and has already undergone further contended cited by the prosecution earlier petition on shows the pace of THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-54806 Date of decision: VERSUS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Pardeep Kumar, Advocate for the Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab. ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant second petition has been Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.72 dated 120-B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, District Mansa. earned counsel appearing on behalf up by the prosecution is that Rehman relationship with daughter of Amandeep to be paramour of Amandeep Kaur Kaur, the petitioner allegedly called Rehman murder. He further contends that Kaur and Balkaran Singh have already further contended that the petitioner is undergone an actual custody of nearly contended that the trial is still midway and prosecution have been examined so on 24.07.2025 only 02 witnesses have of the trial. He submits that the petitioner PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 54806-2025(O&M) decision: 11.03.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ the petitioner. . filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 21.09.2022 registered under Code, 1860 at Police Station behalf of the petitioner contends Rehman Khan (since deceased) Amandeep Kaur. The petitioner-Jiwan Kaur and that on the asking of Rehman Khan (since deceased) that other co-accused namely dy been granted concession of is in custody since 22.09.2022 nearly 03 and a half years. It is and only 12 out of 24 witnesses so far. Since withdrawal of the have been examined, the same petitioner has clean antecedents SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.11 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 124 CRM-M-54806-2025(O&M) and has never extended any threat. The material witnesses have already been examined and release of the petitioner is not likely to influence the case of the prosecution. 4. Learned State Counsel does not dispute the submissions as aforesaid but contends that allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into consideration the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner i.e. nearly 03 and half years and his clean antecedents, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 11.03.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.11 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document