CRM-M-49296- IN THE H (113) NIRMAL SINGH STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. P Ms. R MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Section 302 of IPC added later 2. The a got recorded by th younger son Sukh with some case. O was present in her gate, she found fo been sent by Suk -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH
INGH @ NIMMA Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Pu ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ail in case arising out of FIR No.15 n 302/34 of IPC and Section 25 of Ar d later on) at Police Station City Moga The aforementioned FIR, was registe by the complainant Mahinder Kaur, o Sukhdev Singh @ Sebu was confined ase. On the same day, she, along wit in her house when someone knocked und four persons to be present there. y Sukhdev Singh. They came insid JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-49296-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.03.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
ANISHA BATRA
for the petitioner G, Punjab by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 155 dated 16.07.2023 registered of Arms Act (Section 120B and 212 Moga, District Moga. registered on the basis of statement aur, on 16.07.2023 alleging that her nfined in Faridkot Jail in connection ng with her husband Santokh Singh, ocked at her house. On opening the there. They disclosed that they had e inside and asked for water. The 2026 ction grant tered 212 ment t her ction ingh, g the had he AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49296- husband of the co persons took out a Her husband had f raised clamour, on the injuries. After 3. As pe recorded her suppl between her son S Goru Bachha due and had got comm under Section 12 nominated as such basis of which, ac and Amritpal w investigation, Jagm statement to the ef had formed a ga committed from th Amritpal Singh @ On the basis of his accused and was admitting his invo and Jaskaran Sing -2025 (O&M) 2 the complainant also reached there. k out a pistol from his pocket, and fir had fallen down due to the impact of ur, on hearing which the assailants fle After registration of FIR, investigation As per the further allegations, on 17 r supplementary statement to the effec r son Sukhdev Singh, confined in jail a due to which Gaurav Sharma was ho committed the murder of her husban on 120-B of IPC was added and as such. He was arrested and suffere ich, accused Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi pal were nominated as co-accuse Jagmohan Singh elder son of the the effect that accused Gaurav Sharm a gang and had got the murder o from the members of the gang namely ngh @ Amba and Nirmal Singh @ Nim s of his statement, the present petitione d was arrested on 24.07.2023. He is involvement in the crime. On his st n Singh @ Karan were nominated as there. Suddenly, one of those four fired shots towards her husband. act of injuries sustained by him. She nts fled. Her husband succumbed to ion proceedings were initiated. on 17.07.2023, the complainant got effect that a quarrel had taken place in jail with one Gaurav Sharma @ holding a grudge against her son husband. On her statement, offence and accused Gaurav Sharma was uffered disclosure statement on the Gopi, Bhupinder Singh @ Bhinda ccused. During the course of e complainant got recorded his Sharma alongwith one Gopi Dalewal rder of the victim Santokh Singh namely Bhupinder Singh @ Bhinda, @ Nimma i.e. the present petitioner. titioner was nominated as additional He suffered disclosure statement his statement, April Singh @ Shera ted as accused. The petitioner also four . . She ed to got place a @ r son ence was the inda e of d his ewal ingh inda, oner. ional ment hera also AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49296- got recovered one co-accused were a 4. It is a falsely implicated Singh, elder son o planted upon him. Singh was not an hearsay only. He involvement of th used in commissio the co-accused an petitioner. The tr prosecution witnes period of more th served by detainin Pamma has alread be given the same allowed. 5. Per c report has argued specific in nature. against the petition -2025 (O&M) 3 d one countrymade pistol .32 bore alo were also arrested. Investigation now It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case on the basis of the s son of the victim, which has no bas n him. No specific overt act has been not an eye-witness to the occurrence y. He had not even disclosed as to ho t of the petitioner in the occurrence. mission of the alleged offence has bee sed and not at his instance. No inju The trial will take considerable time t witnesses has been examined so far. ore than 02 years and 07 months. etaining him in custody anymore. The already been extended benefit of bail. me benefit. It is thus, argued th Per contra, learned State counsel w argued that the allegations against t nature. Keeping in view the gravity etitioner, he does not deserve to be ex re alongwith 03 live cartridges. The now stands completed. l for the petitioner that he has been f the statement of witness Jagmohan o basis. A false recovery has been s been attributed to him. Jagmohan rence and his statement is based on s to how he came to know about the ence. The weapon that was actually has been recovered at the instance of o injury has been attributed to the time to conclude as none out of 26 o far. He has been in custody for a nths. No useful purpose would be e. The co-accused Paramjit Singh @ f bail. On parity, he too deserves to ued that the petition deserves to be nsel while relying upon the status ainst the petitioner are serious and ravity of the allegations as levelled be extended benefit of bail. The been ohan been ohan d on t the ually ce of the f 26 for a d be h @ es to to be tatus and elled AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49296- 6. This parties at consider 7. As pe petitioner is that o petitioner alongw knowledge about t who is the son o Faridkot alongwit his person. As pe members of Sukh the co-accused Pa Jaskaran Singh an named co-accused Singh. The petitio basis of the suppl victim who was n parade of the petit circumstantial evid denied the benefit of more than 02 y been examined so future. It is a m hatching conspirac -2025 (O&M) 4 This Court has heard the rival su nsiderable length. As per the status report, the role that on the asking of accused Deepa longwith the co-accused Surinderpa about the whereabouts of family memb son of the victim Santokh Singh an ngwith one Ghoru Bachha, who had As per the allegations, after securing Sukhdev Singh @ Sebu, the petition sed Paramjit Singh @ Pamma, Surind ngh and in pursuance of that conspir ccused committed the offence of m petitioner was not named in the FIR a supplementary statement of the Jagm was not an eye-witness to the occur e petitioner is shown to have been co ial evidence. The petitioner has crimi enefit of bail due to that reason. He h n 02 years and 07 months, however, ned so far. There are bleak chances of is a matter of trial as to whether th nspiracy or committing the murder of val submissions made by both the role that has been attributed to the Deepa Rorki and Gopi Dalewal, the nderpal Singh @ Gandhi obtained members of Sukhdev Singh @ Sebu gh and was lodged in Central Jail o had allegedly inflicted injuries on ecuring knowledge about the family etitioner hatched a conspiracy with Surinderpal Singh, April Singh and onspiracy, he alongwith the above- of murder of the victim Santokh FIR and has been nominated on the e Jagmohan Singh-elder son of the occurrence. No test identification een conducted. The case rests upon s criminal antecedents but cannot be He has been in custody for a period ever, not even a single witness has ces of conclusion of trial in the near ther the petitioner was involved in er of the victim. It is well-settled the the l, the ined Sebu l Jail s on mily with and - tokh n the f the ation upon ot be eriod s has near d in ttled AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49296- law that the Court certain factors in m ground to believe which are peculiar nature and gravity conviction, the da and reasonable app the same time, t considered while d with an offence. provide a new c circumstances. Th law prefers bail o requirements of t placed on the obse @ Hussain v. Stat observed that the often than not, app are more likely to upon Manmandal (Criminal) No. 8 State of Odisha, accused who had b the trial was like -2025 (O&M) 5 Court, while considering an applicatio rs in mind such as whether there is a elieve that the accused has committe eculiar to the accused, likelihood of t ravity of the accusation, severity of t the danger of the accused absconding ble apprehension of the witnesses bein ime, the period of incarceration is while deciding whether bail should be ence. It has also been held that eve new cause of action for filing a b es. This principle is a part of the broad bail over jail, aiming to balance the s of the criminal justice system. Re e observations made by the Hon’ble A . State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC O at the jails are overcrowded and the ot, appalling. The danger of unjustified ely to be hardened rather than reforme ndal and Another v. State of West B o. 8656 of 2023 decided on 14.09 ha, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 110, wh o had been incarcerated for a period of s likely to take considerable time. lication for grant of bail, has to keep e is a prima facie case or reasonable mmitted the offence, circumstances d of the offence being repeated, the ty of the punishment in the event of nding or fleeing if released on bail, es being threatened, etc. However, at on is also a relevant factor to be uld be granted to an accused charged at every day spent in custody can g a bail application under certain e broader approach emphasizing that e the rights of the accused with the m. Reliance in this regard can be n’ble Apex Court in Mohd. Muslim C OnLine SC 352, wherein it was nd their living conditions are, more ustified imprisonment is that inmates eformed. Reliance can also be placed est Bengal, Special Leave Petition 4.09.2023 and Rabdi Prakash v. , wherein bail was granted to the riod of almost two to three years and time. By observing that prolonged keep able nces , the nt of bail, er, at o be rged can rtain that h the n be lim t was more ates laced ion v. o the s and nged AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-49296- incarceration gene guaranteed under A 8. On an case in the light o petitioner has suff months and 04 da this Court is of t petitioner at this s ordered to be relea the satisfaction o Magistrate concern 9. In the petitioner, it shal application seekin 10. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 11. Since any, is rendered in 05.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 6 n generally militates against the mos under Article 21 of the Constitution. On analyzing the peculiar facts and light of the aforementioned principle as suffered prolonged incarceration fo days, the co-accused has already is of the opinion that a case is made this stage. Accordingly, the petition i e released on bail on furnishing perso tion of the learned trial Court/Ch oncerned In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent to seeking cancellation of bail. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
   e most precious fundamental right ts and circumstances of the present nciples of law, it transpires that the tion for over a period of 02 years 07 ready been extended benefit of bail, s made out for grant of bail to the tition is allowed and the petitioner is personal as well as surety bonds to urt/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty y FIR/complaint lodged against the dent to seek redressal by filing an vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
right esent t the 07 bail, the er is ds to Duty t the g an y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.