CRM-M-22530- IN THE H (227) RAMDEEP SING SINGH STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. S *** MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S (for short “BNS” Talwandi Sabo, D 2. The a recorded by comp 28.06.2025, he al where they were gandasa accompa complainant reach -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH SINGH @ RAMMI @ RAMMU Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Prince Pal Singh, Advocate for th Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 115(2), 118, 3(5) of BNS”) (Section 109 of BNS added bo, District Bathinda. The aforementioned FIR was registe complainant – Jagjeet Singh @ Gagg he along with one Satnam Singh @ were talking to each other, when companied by the petitioner and t reached there. All of them were arme JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-22530-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 29.04.2026 MMU SINGH @ RAMANDEEP ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA e for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.150 dated 05.07.2025 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 added later on) at Police Station registered on the basis of statement Gaggi, alleging that on the night of gh @ Sattu was sitting in a dhaba hen Manpreet Singh armed with a two persons unknown to the armed with weapons. They opened 2026 EEP oner dent nder SS”) 2025 2023 ation ment ht of haba ith a the ened AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22530- an assault upon th the person of the caused injuries to they fled from the taken place betwee 3. After initiated. The me Investigating Agen @ Gaggi was opin Manpreet Singh recovered from t Investigation now 4. It is a falsely implicated further investigat considerable time the same incident the complainant p custody anymore. extended benefit o bail. It is, thus, arg 5. Notic -2026 (O&M) 2 pon the complainant. The petitioner of the complainant and Satnam Singh ies to them with their respective weap om the spot. The cause of grudge wa between them previously. After registration of the FIR, inv he medico legal reports of the vic g Agency as per which one injury sus as opined to be dangerous in nature. ingh were arrested on 21.07.2025. rom the petitioner. Co-accused wer n now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. He is in custody sin estigation as the same stands con e time to conclude. Even the petitioner cident and a cross case has been regi nant party. No useful purpose would more. His antecedents are clean. The nefit of bail. On parity, he too deser argued that the petition deserves to Notice of motion. ioner struck blows with gandasa on Singh @ Sattu whereas others also e weapons. On clamour being raised, ge was that some minor scuffle had R, investigation proceedings were e victims were collected by the ry sustained by victim Jagjeet Singh ature. The petitioner and co-accused 2025. The weapon of offence was d were also arrested subsequently. for the petitioner that he has been dy since long. He is not required for s concluded. The trial will take titioner had also sustained injuries in n registered against the members of ould be served by detaining him in n. The co-accused has already been deserves to be extended benefit of rves to be allowed. a on also d, had were the ingh used was ntly. been d for take es in rs of m in been fit of AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22530- 6. Learn ready to argue the vehemently argued against the petition 7. This C for the parties at co 8. The p caused simple as sustained by one o has also sustained report, one of inju The allegations aforementioned of since 21.07.2025. matter. The trial fruitful purpose w settled proposition trial incarceration object of jail is to punitive or preven may abscond or co 9. In vi considered opinion -2026 (O&M) 3 Learned State counsel has advance ue the matter. She has placed on reco argued that keeping in view the gravit oner, he does not deserve to be ex This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner along with co-accused le as well as grievous injuries to the one of the injured was opined to be d stained injuries in the same incident of injuries so sustained, has been op tions prima facie make out a ca ned offences as against the petitione .2025. He is not required for purpose trial is likely to take considerable ose would be served by detaining him osition of law that bail is the rule and j ration should not be a replica of po l is to secure appearance of the accuse preventive. There is nothing on reco d or commit similar offences. In view of the discussion as made opinion that a case for release of the p vance notice of the petition and is on record custody certificate and has gravity of the allegations as levelled be extended the benefit of bail. ubmissions made by learned counsel ccused is alleged to have voluntarily to the victims. One of such injuries o be dangerous in nature. He himself cident and as per the medical legal en opined to be grievous in nature. a case for commission of the titioner. However, he is in custody rpose of further investigation in the time to conclude. As such, no him in custody anymore. It is well e and jail is an exception and the pre- of post conviction sentencing. The accused during trial and it cannot be n record to show that the petitioner ade above, this Court is of the f the petitioner on bail is made out. d is d has elled unsel tarily uries self legal ture. the tody n the , no well - The ot be ioner f the ut. AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22530- Accordingly, the p on bail subject to satisfaction of l petitioner shall, ho residential address round the clock. H every date of hear of bail. Similarly, nature, that will am be open to the Sta this Court. 10. It is, shall not be constr shall not influence 11. Since any, is rendered in 29.04.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 , the petition is allowed and the petiti ject to his furnishing personal bonds a of learned trial Court/CJM/Duty however, keep the trial Court info ddress and his mobile number. He wil ck. He will also remain present befo f hearing, failing which it shall be tak ilarly, if the petitioner is found involv will amount to misuse of concession o he State to apply for cancellation of ba It is, however, clarified that the ob construed as an expression of opinion uence the outcome of the trial. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No petitioner is directed to be released onds as well as surety bonds to the uty Magistrate concerned. The informed about any change in his He will keep his mobile phone active before the trial Court on each and be taken as misuse of the concession involved in any other case of similar sion of bail and in that event, it shall n of bail without further reference to e observations made hereinabove inion on the merits of the case and een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No ased o the The n his ctive and ssion lar shall ce to bove and n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.