CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792---- 130 130 130 130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Aryan Patel State of Punjab Date of Date of Date of Date of Decision Decision Decision Decision Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL attempt seeking 19.06.2023, registered for the off of the IPC, 1860 Sahnewal, District Ludhiana (Punjab). 2. petitioner, Aryan Patel, the co and Deepak persons, formed an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of their common object, committed the murder of Ansh Kumar @ Lallu, son of the complainant, Gautam Prasad. he received a telephone call from his younger son, Anshuman Kumar, ----2026 2026 2026 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 Versus Punjab Decision Decision Decision Decision: : : : July 15 July 15 July 15 July 15, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: July 15 July 15 July 15 July 15, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Vishavjeet Singh Rishi, Advocate Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition filed under Section seeking regular bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No registered for the offences punishable under Section of the IPC, 1860 (Section 323 of the IPC added later on), at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana (Punjab). The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner petitioner, Aryan Patel, the co-accused, namely, Balwant Singh, Sunny Kumar and Deepak Paswan, along with one Chunu and several other unidentified persons, formed an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of their common object, committed the murder of Ansh Kumar @ Lallu, son of the complainant, Gautam Prasad. The complainant alleged that on he received a telephone call from his younger son, Anshuman Kumar, 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2026 2026 2026 2026 ….Petitioner …Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab. filed under Section 483 of the BNSS is the 2nd in case bearing FIR No.162 dated ences punishable under Sections 302, 148, 149 (Section 323 of the IPC added later on), at Police Station allegations against the petitioner is that the accused, namely, Balwant Singh, Sunny Kumar along with one Chunu and several other unidentified persons, formed an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of their common object, committed the murder of Ansh Kumar @ Lallu, son of the complainant, that on 19.06.2023 at about 1:00 p.m., he received a telephone call from his younger son, Anshuman Kumar, 1111 ….Petitioner …Respondent nd dated 302, 148, 149 (Section 323 of the IPC added later on), at Police Station the accused, namely, Balwant Singh, Sunny Kumar along with one Chunu and several other unidentified persons, formed an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of their common object, committed the murder of Ansh Kumar @ Lallu, son of the complainant, 19.06.2023 at about 1:00 p.m., he received a telephone call from his younger son, Anshuman Kumar, MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 informing him that Ansh Kumar @ Lallu had been involved in an altercation with Balwant Singh and his 8–10 associates at Indira Park, Indira Colony, Giaspura. Upon receiving the information, the complainant immediately rushed from his factory to the spot, where he allegedly witnessed Balwant Singh, along with his accomplices, assaulting his son with dattars and other deadly weapons, resulting in his death. It is further alleged that, being unarmed, the complainant was unable to intervene and, out of fear, watched the occurrence while concealing himself. On raising an alarm, the accused persons allegedly fled from the scene on motorcycles along with their weapons. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 22.06.2023. Learned counsel has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further urged that the prime prosecution witness, namely, PW – Mohit Kumar (who is also alleged to have suffered injuries) has turned hostile. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner is in custody for more than 03 years, & the witnesses are not coming forth despite repeated bailable warrants having been issued against them. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated 04.07.2026, in the Court today, 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 22.06.2026, whereinafter, the investigation was carried out and the challan qua petitioner has been presented MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 on 15.04.2024. Total 24 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is conceded case before this Court that only 07 have been examined till date. It is not in dispute that one of the prime witness, namely, PW – Mohit Kuamr has turned hostile. It is, thus, indubitable that culmination of trial will take its own time. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 4 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 4 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 4 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 94 94 94, which reads thus: ““““18. Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. This humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may be social and economic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with indigence or other privations. 19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime. 20. We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a convict. The over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be. 21. We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as well as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article 21 of the Constitution.”””” The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall essentially 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. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 6.1. As per custody certificate dated 04.07.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 03 years and 07 days, & is not shown to be involved in any other FIR(s). 6.2. Indubitably, the present petition is the 2nd attempt by the petitioner to secure regular bail. The last bail plea was dismissed as withdrawn on 07.04.2025. However, keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially, extended custody of the petitioner & pace of trial; this Court is inclined to affirmatively consider the instant petition. A profitable reference, in this regard, can be made to a judgment of this Court passed in CRA CRA CRA CRA----SSSS----233 233 233 2332222----2023 2023 2023 2023 titled as Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another; relevant whereof reads as under: ““““10. As an epilogue to the above discussion, the following principles emerge: I Second/successive regular bail petition(s) filed is maintainable in law & hence such petition ought not to be rejected solely on the ground of maintainability thereof. II. Such second/successive regular bail petition(s) is maintainable whether earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn/dismissed as not pressed/dismissed for non-prosecution or earlier petition was dismissed on merits. III For the second/successive regular bail petition(s) to succeed, the petitioner/applicant shall be essentially/pertinently required to show substantial change in circumstances and showing of a mere superficial or ostensible change would not suffice. The metaphoric expression of seeking second/successive bail plea(s) ought not be abstracted into literal iterations of petition(s) without substantial, effective and consequential change in circumstances. IV No exhaustive guidelines can possibly be laid down as to what would constitute substantial change in circumstances as every case has its own unique facts/circumstance. Making such an attempt is nothing but an utopian endeavour. Ergo, this issue is best left to the judicial wisdom and discretion of the Court dealing with such second/successive regular bail petition(s). V In case a Court chooses to grant second/successive regular bail petition(s), cogent and lucid reasons are pertinently required to be recorded for granting such plea despite such a plea being second/successive petition(s). In other words, the cause for a Court having successfully countenanced/entertained such MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 5555 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 second/successive petition(s) ought to be readily and clearly decipherable from the said order passed.”””” 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 allowed allowed allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in 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 cellphone 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. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 6666 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----28792 28792 28792 28792----2026 2026 2026 2026 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July 15 July 15 July 15 July 15, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.15 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment