CRM-M-32757-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 228 CRM-M-32757-2026 Date of decision : 07.07.2026 NAVDEEP SINGH ... PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Harshit Nain, Advocate, Ms. Anisha Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Vinod K. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate and Ms. Shikha Singla, Advocate for the complainant. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.002 dated 01.01.2026, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) & 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 323, 324, 506 & 34 IPC), Section 103 BNS (erstwhile Section 302 IPC) added later on, registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with his co- accused caused injuries to deceased-Naranjan Singh when he was sitting on a tractor. It is alleged that the petitioner gave a sudden push to Naranjan Singh, as a result of which he fell down from the tractor and sustained injuries. The injured was thereafter admitted to the hospital and was subsequently discharged on 06.01.2026. However, after about one month of the alleged occurrence, Naranjan Singh expired on 31.01.2026. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.08 16.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32757-2026 -2- was septicaemia consequent to blunt trauma to the chest and accordingly, offence under Section 103 BNS (erstwhile Section 302 IPC) was added later on. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case due to a long-standing land dispute between the parties. He further submits that there is no incriminating evidence to suggest that the petitioner had any intention or motive to cause the death of deceased-Naranjan Singh. It is submitted that the deceased was initially admitted in the hospital and was subsequently discharged, however, he expired after a period of about one month from the date of occurrence. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death was septicaemia consequent to blunt trauma to the chest and, therefore, no offence is made out against the petitioner under Section 103 BNS, 2023. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 months and 07 days. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the short affidavit by way of an affidavit of Mr. Gurinder Singh Bal, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Nabha, District Patiala and the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court, which are taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 months and 07 days. He, upon instructions, submits that none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.08 16.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32757-2026 -3- 6. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and he does not deserve the concession of regular bail. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 months and 07 days; as per the post-mortem report, the cause of death was septicaemia consequent to blunt trauma to the chest and that the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude as none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. 9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 10. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State/complainant would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail. (H.S.GREWAL) July 07, 2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.08 16.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh