IN THE 217 Chand Singh @ Chand State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Ms. Dr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ CRM-14177-2026 Allowed, Main case The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 304(2), 238, 117(2), 118(2) Sanhita, 2023 at 2. The Satnam Singh son Amritsar. The same “…I and Nanak neighbour Rasulpur of my persons. THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-17822 Date of decision: Chand VERSUS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Monika Tanwar, Advocate for the (Ms.) Savi Nagpal, AAG, Punjab ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 2026 Allowed, as prayed for, subject to all The instant first petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.36 dated 304(2), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(1), 118(2) and 317(2) added later on] at Police Station Mohkampura, District The FIR in the present case has been son of Niranjan Singh resident same reads as under: “…I am resident of the above address and at present I am under treatment Nanak Dev Hospital. On 2.4.2025 neighbour Sukhbir Singh son of Waryam Rasulpur Kalar, Jora Fatak, Amritsar my village i.e. Chucha, Chand, C.H., persons. I along with some other persons PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 17822-2026(O&M) decision: 09.04.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ the petitioner. Punjab . all just exceptions. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 04.04.2025 registered under 351(3), 191(3) 190 [Sections on] of the Bharatiya Nyaya District Amritsar. registered on the statement of of Village Rasulpur Kalar, address and do the work of labour at Surgical Ward No.3, Guru 2.4.2025 at 8/9 p.m. at night, my Waryam Singh resident of village Amritsar was caused injuries by boys C.H., mithun, and 5/6 unknown persons had taken Sukhbir Singh SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 217 CRM-M-17822-2026(O&M) to Civil Hospital, Amritsar for getting him admitted for treatment and after that on 3.4.2025 at about 4.30 a.m. I and Dharminder Singh son of Natha Singh resident of village, Rasulpur Kalar on motorcycle were going from Civil Hospital to my house and the motorcycle was being driven by Dharminder Singh and I was ridding pillion and at about 4.55 a.m. when we reached near Hari Mandir, Bittu Karyana Store, Village Rasulpur Kalar, then from behind, on two motorcycles 7 young persons with short hair, Chucha son of Sonu armed with Datar, Chand son of Harbans Singh armed with Datar, C.H. son of Nikka armed with Datar, Mithu armed with Datar, Munish, resident of village Rasulpur Kalar, Jora Fatak and 2 unknown persons driving the vehicle who were having baseball and they stopped the motorcycle in front of us and stopped us forcibly and Chand raised lalkara that catch hold of him and teach him a lesson for taking Sukhbir Singh to Civil Hospital for treatment and in the meantime, Chucha attacked me with his Datar which hit me on my head and then CH attacked me with his Datar, which hit me on my head and I fell down on the ground and while I was lying down Mithun attacked me with his Datar from reverse side towards my head and I raised my left arm to save myself and it hit me on the wrist of my left arm and Chucha attacked me with his Datar again from the reverse side which hit me on the knee of my left leg and Chand again attacked me with his Datar from the reverse side which hit me on my left shoulder, then C.H. again attacked me with his Datar from the reverse side which hit me on my waist and then both the unknown persons attacked me with their baseballs which hit me on my left shoulder and Chand snatched my phone gave make Vivo and about Rs.33500/- and Manish me fist and kick blows. I and Dharminder Singh raised noise “killed-killed” and the aggressors ran away from the spot on their motorcycle while giving threats to kill. I shall produce my MLR along with report regarding the injuries afterwards. The reason for the grudge is that I had taken Sukhbir Singh to hospital for treatment, due to SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 217 CRM-M-17822-2026(O&M) which all the accused caused me injuries with their weapon. Legal action be taken against them.” 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner is in custody since 04.04.2025.The investigation in the case is already complete but the charges have not been framed. There are total 22 witnesses to be examined. She further contends that all the offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate. It is submitted that only simple injuries are attributed to the petitioner and that too on the non-vital parts. She further submits that another allegation on the petitioner is with respect to snatching of mobile phone and Rs.33,500/-. She, however, contends that the petitioner is a young boy aged 19 years and deserves leniency. 4. Learned State Counsel on the other hand contends that there are specific attributions against the petitioner. She, however, does not dispute the custody already undergone by the petitioner and the stage of trial. The facts that the charge has not yet been framed and that there are 22 witnesses to the examined are also not disputed. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into consideration the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner i.e. nearly 01 year in a case triable by the Magistrate coupled with the fact that the charges have not yet been framed alongwith the young age of the petitioner i.e. 19 years, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 217 CRM-M-17822-2026(O&M) 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 09.04.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.10 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document