231 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37402-2026 Date of Decision:16.07.2026 Rahul Kumar @ Rahul …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Varinder Basa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Sr. DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (under Section 439 Cr.P.C) with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.333, dated 06.11.2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 118, 118(2), 190 and 191(3) of B.N.S {Sections 323,324,326,148 and 149 of IPC} at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Gurdaspur, Punjab (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the occurrence had taken place in the present case on 20.10.2025, whereas, the F.I.R was got registered by the complainant on 06.11.2025, after an unexplained delay of 16 days. Even as per the prosecution version, the petitioner was allegedly armed with a danda and had caused injuries on the head, above ear and right wrist of the complainant. The injury on wrist has been declared to be grievous in nature. HITESH 2026.07.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-37402-2026 -2 He further submits that after completion of investigation challan has already been presented against him and no witness has been examined so far. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and the present petition deserves to be dismissed by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. In the present case, the petitioner along with his other co-accused had attacked the injured. Even, the injured in the present case has already been discharged from the hospital. Even, there is no material to show that the petitioner may tamper with the prosecution evidence or may abscond from the process of law. He is in custody since 18.03.2026 and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 16.07.2026 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2026.07.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh