CRM-M-35769-2025 & 1 CRM-M-47120-2025 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1) CRM-M-35769-2025 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 MANINDER SINGH ALIAS MANJINDER SINGH @ MANI ......... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ….... Respondent 2) CRM-M-47120-2025 JASPREET SINGH @ HAPPY …...Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB …..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-35769-2025. Mr. L.S. Sekhon, Advocate and Mr. G.S. Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-47120-2025. Mr. Gorav Kathuria, DAG Punjab. **** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral) 1. By this common order, above noted bail applications shall be adjudicated as the same have arisen out of the same FIR. 2. This is the first petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.54, dated 01.07.2024, registered at Police Station Rureke Kalan, District Barnala, under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 238, 331(6) and 341(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel have been heard and material collected by the police during investigation has been perused. ASGAR ALI 2025.09.09 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35769-2025 & 2 CRM-M-47120-2025 4. In compliance of order dated 01.09.2025, status report by way of affidavit dated 05.09.2025 of Gurbinder Singh PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Tapa, District Barnala filed on behalf of the respondent-State in CRM-M-47120-2025 is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place. 5. The present case was registered on the basis of complaint given to the police by Jarnail Singh with the allegations that he has got three sons namely Jaswinder Singh, Jagraj Singh and Jaspal Singh out of whom Jagraj Singh and Jaspal Singh reside alongwith him in the house situated outside the village in the field while Jaswinder Singh who is unmarried and was a member of Budha Dal Nihang Singhs for the last 20 years resides alone in the old house of the family situated in the village. He was a preacher and villagers used to come and hear his sermons. On 01.07.2024 at about 7.30 AM, he alongwith his son Jagraj Singh visited the house of Jaswinder Singh and found the gate of the house lying open and his body lying on the cot in a pool of blood. He alleged that his son has been murdered by some unknown persons by causing injuries to him with sharp edged weapons on his face and neck and he sought action against the assailants. Matter was investigated and on the basis of statement of Jagraj Singh, brother of the deceased, Paramjit Singh alias Pamma, Maninder Singh alias Mani (petitioner), Jaspreet Singh alias Happy and Sukhvir Singh were named as accused in the present case vide Rapat No.28 dated 06.07.2024. On 07.07.2024, Paramjit Singh alias Pamma was arrested and thereafter, Jaspreet Singh was arrested on 07.07.2024 and petitioner-Maninder Singh was arrested on 30.01.2025. After completion of usual investigation, final report was presented for ASGAR ALI 2025.09.09 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35769-2025 & 3 CRM-M-47120-2025 trial. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. It was a blind murder and no one had seen the occurrence taking place. Complainant had seen the dead body lying on a cot in the morning and informed the police and later on, another son of the complainant had nominated the petitioners on the basis of suspicion and they are in custody since 30.01.2025 and 07.07.2024 respectively. Learned counsel next contended that initially co-accused Paramjit Singh alias Pamma was arrested and Jaspreet Singh suffered disclosure statement, admitting having committed the offence and thereafter, accused Inderjit Singh was also arrested and he had also suffered disclosure statement, admitting having committed the offence but there is no other evidence against them except the disclosure statements of co-accused as well as their own disclosure statements. Learned counsel further contended that the recovery of the Kirpans has been effected from both of them allegedly from a canal. Prosecution has cited 20 prosecution witnesses in all and not a single witness has been examined till date. Present case is based on circumstantial evidence and no value can be attached to the own disclosure statements of the accused and their further detention is, thus, not required and they may be released on bail. 7. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the bail and argued that petitioners have committed a heinous offence and in pursuance of their disclosure statements, they have got recovered the weapons of offence used in committing the offence. The trial is at initial stage and in case, they are released on bail, they will try to intimidate the ASGAR ALI 2025.09.09 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35769-2025 & 4 CRM-M-47120-2025 witnesses or win them over and learned State counsel prayed that the bail application be dismissed. 8. The present case is based on circumstantial evidence. No one was named in the FIR and no one had seen the occurrence taking place. Petitioners were named by one of the brother of the deceased in a supplementary statement and may be on the basis of suspicion. Petitioner-Jaspreet Singh is in custody since 07.07.2024 while accused- petitioner Maninder Singh is in custody since 30.01.2025. Except their own disclosure statements, there is no other evidence against them. As to how much evidentiary value will be attached to the disclosure statements and recovery of the kirpans from the canal shall be the moot questions, during the trial. Not a single witness has been examined till date out of the 20 witnesses cited by the prosecution and trial is, thus, certainly going to take a sufficiently long time to conclude and in these circumstances, further detention of the petitioners is not required and they deserve to be released on bail. 9. Having regard to the aforesaid factual position, but without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions. (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) JUDGE 08.09.2025 Ali Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No ASGAR ALI 2025.09.09 08:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document