CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -1 112+113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision:18.08.2025 Amanpreet Singh @ Aman …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent (ii) CRM-M-23744-2023 (O&M) Guraditta Singh @ Ananda @ Babu …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent (iii) CRM-M-25883-2023 (O&M) Surinder Singh @ Kaali …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present: Mr. Gopal Singh Mahel, Advocate with Ms. Diksha, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-2962-2023. Dr. Rau P.S.Girwar, Advocate with Ms. Archana Arora Rau, Advocate Ms. K.T.Rau, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-23744-2023. Mr. Abhaysher Singh, Advocate for Mr. A.A Pathak, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-25883-2023. Mr. I.P.S Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. K.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant in CRM-M-2962-2023. HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -2 Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate for the complainant in CRM-M-25883 & 23744-2023. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. 1. This order shall dispose off three bail petitions i.e CRM-M-2962- 2023 (O&M) titled as “Amanpreet Singh @ Aman Vs. State of Punjab”, CRM-M-23744-2023 (O&M) titled as “Guraditta Singh @ Ananda @ Babu Vs. State of Punjab” and CRM-M-25883-2023 (O&M) titled as “Surinder Singh @ Kaali Vs. State of Punjab”, whereby the petitioners have prayed for grant of regular bail to them in case arising out of FIR No.191, dated 22.10.2021, registered under Sections 302,307,323,506,148,149,120-B of IPC and under Sections 25,27,54 and 59 of Arms Act, Police Station Civil Lines, Bathinda, District Bathinda. 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Manpreet Singh son of Jaskaran Singh and the same has been reproduced below:- Copy of statement of Manpreet Singh son of Jaskaran Singh son of Jagraj Singh, resident of Mehma Bhagwana, P.S. Nahianwala aged about 32 years, stated that I am a resident of aforesaid address and doing agricultural work. That we are two brothers myself and my younger brother Hassandeep Singh aged about 25/26 years who has got his mobile no. 97798-75731. In 2008 I after completing my studies helping my father in work of agriculture and my younger brother was studying in DAV College, Bathinda in B.A. Today at about 01:00 pm I and my brother Hassandeep had come to Bathinda for taking parts of the combine where my brother Hassandeep Singh met his friend of our village Parminder Singh @ Bhau, Pindi son of Nirmal Singh, Boota Singh son of Ranjit Singh, resident of Jandawala along with their own HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -3 weapons came towards my brother and his friends sitting in the park and they while entering stated that today they be taught lesson for breaking the legs of Kali. None from them should go unheard and while saying this Billa aimed his 315 bore gun while the others along with own weapons like rods with an intention to kill them caused injuries on the arms and legs of my brother and his friend Boota Singh and Billa with intention to commit murder fired from his 315 bore gun straight on Boota Singh which hit him on his legs and declared that they should not go unhurt on that day and out of them some young persons came towards my brother Hassandeep Singh and my brother tried to run away then Gurpreet Singh and about 4/5 unknown young persons while my brother Hassandeep Singh came out of the park gate in the outer street, then Gurpreet Singh fired with his pistol in his own hands which hit at the chest of my brother and my brother fell down on the road and all the young person's continued saying that today he should not escape and with their own weapons continued to cause injuries and out of them one young person fired from his gun 12 bore with intention to commit murder of my brother and during this time one fire hit a passerby person. I raise sufficient raula saying "Na Maro Na Maro" on which many people from surroundings collected and seeing the aforesaid gathering all the young person's along with their weapons went away from the spot in their respective cars after causing injuries to my brother and Boota Singh and ran away. 1 also out of fear could save my life with great difficulty and went away from there. Then after some time I along with some respectable from my village reached at Civil Hospital, Bathinda where after reaching there I came to know that my brother Hassandeep Singh had expired and his dead body was lying in the dead house Civil Hospital, Bathinda and Boota Singh, his friend was sent by the doctor of Civil Hospital Bathinda to a higher hospital and he was admitted in Cosmo Hospital for the treatment. HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -4 Apart from this I also want to tell you that I know the aforesaid persons from earlier time because these persons had been coming to my brother Hassandeep Singh and the unknown persons can be identified by me if produced before me. The motive of causing injuries is that some time ago Surinder Singh @ Kali was caused injuries by Boota Singh etc. Due to this today they have caused the death of my brother and Boota Singh also has been caused injuries with intention to commit murder. Legal action be taken against the aforesaid young persons. I have got written my statement, understood it and found to be correct...Sd/- Manpreet Singh”. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Amanpreet Singh @ Aman (petitioner in CRM-M-2962-2023) submits that the petitioner has been named in the FIR and it has been falsely shown that he came at the spot in his Accent Car of black colour. The petitioner was allegedly driving the car, in which the accused came at the place of occurrence. However, no specific role has been attributed to the present petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of investigation, the police has alleged to have recovered a Polo car bearing registration No.PB-03-AA-5524, which was allegedly owned by the petitioner and also recovered .12 bore gun which was allegedly used in the commission of crime and it was the licensed gun of the petitioner. Even, lives cartridges and certain used cartridges were also recovered from the petitioner. He further contends that in the present case, Baljinder @ Billa had allegedly fired on Buta Singh, since deceased, whereas, Gurpreet Singh @ Gora had allegedly fired on Hasandeep, since deceased. However, no overt act has been attributed to the present petitioner. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 22.10.2021 and is in custody for the last 03 years and 10 months. HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -5 During the course of trial, now the prosecution has examined PW-1, complainant and PW-2 Parminder Singh, an independent witness. Moreover, the prosecution is yet to examine 20 more witnesses and the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time. 4. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of Surinder Singh @ Kaali (petitioner in CRM-M-25883-2023) submits that after completion of investigation, the police had presented the challan only against Gurpreet Singh, Amanpreet Singh and Daler Singh, while the names of the petitioner and four more co-accused were shown in column No.2. Later on, the petitioner was also arrested on 28.04.2022 and he is in custody since then. He further contends that even the present petitioner was named in the FIR and was shown to be armed with an iron rod. However, no specific injury has been attributed to him. He was simply shown to be part of the unlawful assembly, which has committed the murder of Buta Singh and Hasandeep. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case, due to previous enmity between the parties and deserves to be granted the concession of bail by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Guraditta Singh @ Ananda @ Babu (petitioner in CRM-M-23744-2023) submits that the petitioner was not initially named in the FIR and was nominated as an accused in the present case on the basis of statement made by the complainant on 03.11.2021. Even, as per the improved version, no specific injury has been attributed to the present petitioner and he was wrongly arrested on 11.05.2022. Even, the police has wrongly shown the recovery of one country HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -6 made pistol of 32 bore and 05 live cartridges, however, the said weapon was not used in the commission of crime. Even, it has been stated that the petitioner was allegedly presented at the place of occurrence in the present case. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner(s) on the ground that all the petitioners had participated in the occurrence and there was sufficient evidence on record that they had caused the murder of Butta Singh and Hasandeep, since deceased. Even, Buta Singh had received 09 injuries, whereas, Hasandeep Singh had received 08 injuries. All the petitioners were presented along with other accused and keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations against them, the present petitioners are liable to be dismissed by this Court. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 8. In the present case, Amanpreet Singh @ Aman and Surinder Singh @ Kaali were named in the FIR, however, no specific injuries were attributed to both of them. Guraditta Singh @ Ananda @ Babu was named by the complainant in his supplementary statement, which was recorded, during the course of investigation and as per that also, he was also shown to be present along with other co-accused and there was no specific attribution to him. The prosecution is yet to lead evidence before the Trial Court with regard to the involvement of the petitioners in the crime. The petitioners are stated to be in custody for the last more than three years and the prosecution has been able to examine only two witnesses out of total 22 cited witnesses. Thus, conclusion of HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-2962-2023 (O&M) and connected matters -7 the trial may take quite a long time and custody of the petitioners will not serve any meaningful purpose. 9. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition(s) is allowed. The petitioner(s) are ordered to be released on bail pending trial on their furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. 10. Since the main petition(s) are allowed, pending applications, if any, rendered infructuous. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 18.08.2025 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2025.08.22 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh