CRM-M-25530-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25530-2025 (O&M) Reserved on : 11.09.2025 Pronounced on : 15.09.2025 Parminder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Kainth, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. Prayer in this petition, filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 101 dated 12.05.2023, registered under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Kharar (Sadar), District SAS Nagar. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement recorded by complainant Paramjeet Kaur on 12.05.2023 alleging that on the same day, she along with victim Pardeep Singh @ Deepa, who was her son, was present in her house, when the petitioner and co-accused Gurmeet Singh @ Geeta, who were his friends, came there and despite his reluctance to accompany them, was forced to go along with them. The complainant followed them when all three of them went out on the road. After reaching outside the house of the petitioner, who is in the neighborhood, he and the co-accused started extending beatings to the victim. When she tried to MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.17 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25530-2025 (O&M) -2- rescue him, accused Gurmeet Singh took out a pistol from his waist side and fired a shot with the same on the chest of the victim, due to which, he fell down. Thereafter, the petitioner as well as co-accused took the victim to PGIMER, Chandigarh in a car bearing registration number PB-65-AC-3316. The complainant also reached there. During the course of treatment, her son had died. While alleging that the petitioner and the co-accused with a common intention to kill him had committed his murder, she prayed for taking action. 3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on the same day. Co-accused Gurmeet Singh was arrested on 15.06.2023. The weapon used in the occurrence was recovered from him. Investigation now stands concluded and the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of the aforementioned offences. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. No injury on the person of the victim has been attributed to him. As per the post-mortem report, the death was due to single firm arm injury attributed to the co-accused. The car allegedly recovered from him belongs to him and it is not the recovery of any incriminating material. The complainant stands examined. There are no chances of his intimidating the complainant or any other material witness. The version of the complainant proves that the petitioner had no hand in the murder of the victim and it appears to be a simpliciter case of accidental firing by the co-accused. The trial will take considerable time to conclude since only 02 witnesses have been examined so far. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.17 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25530-2025 (O&M) -3- He has clean antecedents. In fact, he was arrested from PGIMER, Chandigarh, where he had gone for treatment of the victim by taking him in a car. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is argued by learned State counsel that keeping in view gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, he is not entitled to get benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the material placed on record. 7. The petitioner, in furtherance of his common intention with the co-accused, is alleged to have forcibly taken the victim out of his house on the fateful day, where beatings were extended to him and then he was shot at by the co-accused. No doubt, the fire arm injury has been attributed to co-accused but the allegations as levelled in the FIR by the complainant prima facie prove complicity and active participation of the petitioner in the occurrence. The complainant has been examined and she has duly supported the prosecution version. The allegations against the petitioner are quite serious in nature. Only because of the reason that there is some delay in conclusion of the trial, the same cannot be considered to be a reason for extending benefit of bail to the petitioner since it is well settled proposition of law that the merely the extended/prolonged period of incarceration or examination of some material witnesses is not a ground to extend benefit of bail to the accused in such like cases. Keeping in view the gravity of offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.17 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25530-2025 (O&M) -4- and the attendant facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that the petitioner does not deserve to be given concession of regular bail, at this stage. Hence, the petition stands dismissed. 8. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 15.09.2024 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.17 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document