CRM-M No.60439 of 2024 (O&M) -1- 225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.60439 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.04.2025 Sarwan Singh @ Soni ......... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ......... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present:- Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Chahal, AAG, Punjab for the respondent assisted by ASI Lakha Singh. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking bail pending trial to the petitioner in FIR No.0312 dated 04.12.2023, under Sections 452, 323, 506, 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’); [Sections 302, 307, 324, 34 IPC added later on], registered at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar Rural. GAGANDEEP 2025.04.05 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M No.60439 of 2024 (O&M) -2- (2) Allegations are that petitioner along with co-accused, armed with deadly weapons, trespassed into the premises of complainant party and caused serious injuries to them with their respective weapons, resulting into death of one Kuldeep Singh. (3) Contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case inasmuch as his presence is not established and moreover, there is no specific injury attributed to him. Also contends that petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year; investigation is already over and trial is likely to take sufficient long time, hence, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. Lastly contends that petitioner has been implicated merely on the premise that he happens to be the father of main accused, namely, Veer Singh @ Veeru. (4) Per contra, learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI Lakha Singh, opposed the prayer while submitting that complicity of petitioner is well apparent in view of the specific allegation that he was armed with Datar and which was used by him during the alleged occurrence. (5) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. (6) Although, learned Counsel for the petitioner tried to justify that injury attributed to him pertains to a heeled wound, but after going through the MLRs (P-4 colly.) of injured-Joginder Kaur & Balveer Singh @ Balveet Singh (in-laws of de facto complainant-Ranjit Kaur @ Neetu), it is quite GAGANDEEP 2025.04.05 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M No.60439 of 2024 (O&M) -3- evident that petitioner caused specific injuries to them. Apart that, petitioner also caused injuries to other persons, namely, Kuldeep Singh (since deceased), Rajwinder Kaur, Ravideep Singh, Simranjit Kaur, Sukhwinder Kaur @ Bau & Jarnail Singh (Member Panchayat); thus, his presence is duly established at the time of alleged occurrence and he actively participated in the commission of crime. It is not in dispute that petitioner has been charged for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 323, 452, 506, 148 read with Section 149 IPC by learned trial Court. (7) In view of the above, complicity of the petitioner is, prima facie, well apparent; hence, no ground is made out to grant him the concession of bail pending trial “at this stage”. (8) Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. (9) The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the present case in any manner. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 2nd April, 2025 ( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU ) Gagan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No GAGANDEEP 2025.04.05 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh