Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28211 (PNJ)

SARWAN SINGH ALIAS SHERA v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/10119/2025 · 2025-04-24

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 320 CRM-M No.10119 of 2025 Date of Decision: 24.04.2025 Sarwan Singh @ Shera ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. *** MANISHA BATRA , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in the FIR mentioned below:- FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 170 17.09.2020 Division 1, District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar 307, 148, 149 and 120-B of IPC (201 of IPC added later on) 2. As per the allegations, on 16.09.2020, the complainant Manu @ Billa along with his father and some other persons was present outside his house when the petitioner along with the co-accused reached there armed with weapons, on motorbikes. The accused Rita and Paramjit Kaur MANJU 2025.04.24 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.10119 of 2025 -2- also reached there in the meanwhile and made an exhortation thereby instigating the other accused to not to spare the complainant and his family members. Thereafter, the petitioner and the co-accused opened an assault upon the complainant and his father and caused injuries to them. The grudge was that a quarrel had taken place between accused Rita and Paramjit Kaur on one side and Ravi Sahota on the other, who was at that time present along with complainant and the latter had tried to intervene for effecting a compromise. The petitioner struck a blow with datar on the head of father of the complainant with an intention to kill him and caused him serious injuries. The injuries so sustained had been opined to be grievous in nature. The petitioner was arrested on 13.09.2024 and is in custody since then. Investigation qua him stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody since 13.09.2024. The trial would take considerable time to conclude. Almost all the co-accused have been extended benefit of bail. A compromise has been arrived at between the parties which has been reduced into writing. His further incarcearation would not serve any useful purpose. Accordingly, it is urged that he deserves to be released on bail. 4. Status report has already been filed. It is argued by learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab that there are serious allegations against the petitioner who by forming membership of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object thereof had struck blow with datar on the head of father of the complaiant therey causing him injuries which were MANJU 2025.04.24 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.10119 of 2025 -3- declared to be dangerous to life. It is argued that there is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. Accordingly, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner by forming an unlawful assembly with the co- accused is alleged to have caused injuries to the father of the complainant. The injuries so sustained have been opined to be dangerous in nature. A written compromise is stated to have been arrived at between the parties. The authenticity of the same cannot be considered at this stage. However, the petitioner is in custody since 13.09.2024. The trial would take time to conclude. None of the ten prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. In view of the above discussed facts but without meaning to make any comment on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. (MANISHA BATRA) 24.04.2025 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2025.04.24 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh