CRM-M-69184- IN THE H GURPIAR SING STATE OF PUNJ 1 The dat 2 The dat 3 The dat website 4 Whethe pronoun pronoun 5 The del judgme CORAM: HON Present: Ms. P Ms. P Mr. MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S 323 of IPC deleted -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH SINGH Versus PUNJAB he date when the judgment is reserved he date when the judgment is pronoun he date when the judgment is uploaded ebsite hether only operative part of the judg ronounced or whether the full judgmen ronounced he delay, if any, of the pronouncement dgment and reasons thereof. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Ms. Puja Chopra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Palak Sharma, Advocate for the p Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of nder Sections 307, 323, 379, 148, 149 deleted later on and Section 302 of IPC JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-69184-2025 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondent served 16.03.2026 onounced 20.03.2026 loaded on the 20.03.2026 e judgment is dgment is Full cement of full Not applicable ANISHA BATRA with r the petitioner Punjab preferred by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.27 dated 16.02.2024 8, 149, 120B of IPC (Sections 307, of IPC added later on). M) oner dent nder SS”) 2024 307, AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-69184- 2. The a got recorded by th on the night of 10 when the accused Soni Sainsi, Harry and caused injurie Dhariwal Eye Ho unconscious and accused Balwinde beatings to her son that she was sure his son, she praye Sections 323, 307, proceedings were under Section 302 3. As p Dhanoa and Am interrogation, accu admitting his invo Singh @ Sikande supplementary sta some other person 13.02.2025. Inves -2025 (O&M) 2 The aforementioned FIR was registe the complainant-Surjit Kaur on 16 t of 10.02.2024 her son had gone to JD cused Balwinder Singh Dhanoa in con Harry, Sikander, Thuli and some unkn injuries to him with an intent to kil ye Hospital after causing injuries. S and was lying in coma since that d winder Singh Dhanoa giving instructi her son and to kill him, had gone viral s sure that the above named persons h prayed for taking action. On her sta 3, 307, 379, 120B, 148 and 149 of IPC were initiated. The victim succum n 302 of IPC was added on 18.02.202 As per the further allegations, th d Amanjot Singh @ Thulli were a n, accused Balwinder Singh Dhanoa is involvement in the crime. Subseque ikander @ Bachi was arrested. T ary statement on 21.06.2024 on the ba persons were nominated as accused. Investigation now stands completed. registered on the basis of statement r on 16.02.2024 alleging therein that to JD Gym, Nabha for exercising, in connivance with his accomplices e unknown persons assaulted his son to kill him. They threw him near ies. She alleged that her son was that day. The audio recording of structions to his accomplices to give e viral on social media. By alleging sons had hand in causing injuries to her statement, initially a case under of IPC was registered. Investigation uccumbed to his injuries. Offence 2.2024. ns, the accused Balwinder Singh, ere arrested on 27.02.2024. On hanoa suffered disclosure statement bsequently, the accused Sukhwinder d. The complainant recorded her the basis of which the petitioner and sed. The petitioner was arrested on leted. ment that sing, lices s son near was g of give ging es to nder ation ence ingh, On ment inder her r and d on AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-69184- 4. It is a falsely implicated nominated as an a by the complainan the co-accused. H has been attribute required for furth conclude. His inv for denying bene detaining him in deserves to be allo 5. Per c against the petitio the Social media petitioner was nom making post on t assailants was th antecedents of the other cases. The submissions, it is u 6. This C for the parties at co -2025 (O&M) 3 It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case. He was not nam s an accused on the basis of the supp lainant, 04 months after the occurrenc sed. He was not present at the time o ttributed to him. He is in custody r further investigation. The trial wo is involvement in other cases cannot benefit of bail. No fruitful purpo im in custody anymore. It is, there be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel ha petitioner are serious in nature. An edia regarding the murder of the vic as nominated as accused. The perso t on the Social media claimed that t as there at the time of commissio of the petitioner are not clean, as he The allegations against him are grav , it is urged that the petition does not d This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. l for the petitioner that he has been ot named in the FIR and has been e supplementary statement recorded urrence. He was not even named by time of occurrence. No specific role stody since 15.02.2025. He is not ial would take considerable time to cannot be considered to be a reason purpose is going to be served by , therefore, argued that the petition nsel has argued that the allegations audio recording was posted on he victim on the basis of which the person who took responsibility for that the petitioner alongwith other mission of subject offence. The as he has been involved in several e grave in nature. With these broad s not deserve to be allowed. ubmissions made by learned counsel been been rded d by role not e to ason d by tition tions d on h the y for other The veral road unsel AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-69184- 7. The p accused on the b recorded 04 mont version of the cha is revealed that o some audio was p her son and name persons namely M Admittedly, the a innocent. In the s due to the fact tha by making a post alongwith them. status report. Lea uploaded some au same. The supple made on the basi question as to wh not? He is in cus conclude as only 0 8. Takin meaning to make considered opinio petitioner in custo -2025 (O&M) 4 The petitioner was not named in the the basis of the supplementary stat months after the occurrence. Anne he challan report as filed in this case a that on 21.06.2024, the complainant was posted on Social media by the ac named the petitioner as one of the mely Manjit Kaur @ Kali and Ka the above said Manjit Kaur and K n the status report, it is mentioned tha act that a person who took responsibili a post on Social media, had also cl hem. The contents of the said post, t. Learned State counsel had also not b me audio/video on Social media and supplementary statement of the petitio e basis of any eye-witnessed accoun to whether the petitioner was activel in custody since 15.02.2025. The tri only 02 out of 29 prosecution witnesse Taking into consideration the above make any comment on the merit of opinion that no useful purpose woul custody anymore and a case is mad in the FIR. He was nominated as an ry statement of the complainant as Annexure P3 is copy of translated case and on a perusal of the same it lainant had recorded statement that the accused regarding the murder of f the assailants alongwith 02 more d Karo as assailants to her son. and Karo have been found to be ed that the petitioner was nominated nsibility of the murder of the victim lso claimed that the petitioner was post, have been mentioned in the o not been able to say as to who had a and what were the contents of the petitioner also does not appear to be account. As such it is a debatable actively involved in the incident or he trial will obviously take time to itnesses have been examined so far. above discussed facts but without rit of the case, this Court is of the would be served by detaining the is made out for grant of bail to the as an nt as lated me it that er of e son. o be ated ictim was the had f the to be e nt or e to far. thout f the the o the AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-69184- petitioner, at this s ordered to be relea bonds to the Magistrate/Duty M 9. In th conditions, the re seeking cancellatio 10. Since any, is rendered in 20.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 5 t this stage. Accordingly, the petition i e released on bail subject to his furnis the satisfaction of the learned uty Magistrate concerned. In the eventuality of breach of the respondent-State shall be at lib cellation of the bail. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No tition is allowed and the petitioner is furnishing personal as well as surety arned trial Court/Chief Judicial h of any of the aforementioned at liberty to move an application allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No er is urety icial oned ation n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.