1 CRM-M-37265-2026 (O&M) THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37265-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.07.2026 JASWANT SINGH AND ANOTHER …Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal Present: Mr. Rahi Mehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Akash Yadav, AAG Punjab. Mr. Shubham Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No. 2. *** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. (Oral) 1. Petitioners seek regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 84 dated 01.04.2026 under Sections 109, 326(g), 351(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. This is the first petition for regular bail. 2. Complainant-Manpreet Kaur alleged that she was married with petitioner No. 1-Jaswant Singh, 24 years ago and they had a daughter Komalpreet Kaur besides a son. Petitioner No. 1 was habitual of consuming liquor with petitioner No. 2 and then thrashing her. On 31.03.2026, both petitioners consumed liquor together, whereafter they gave her beatings. When she was going to report the matter, she was stopped by them near Noor Mahalaya near Dera and publically thrashed her. She reported the matter to the police. Petitioners were called to the police station but they did not report. The same night, at 9.00 PM, petitioner No. 1 fought with her and she bolted the door of the house from inside. Petitioner No. 1 and his friend Ravinder (petitioner No. 2) then set on fire motorcycle No. PB 35AQ 2942, parked in the house, in order to set the house ablaze. AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.17 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CRM-M-37265-2026 (O&M) 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioners were in custody w.e.f. 01.04.2026. The genesis of the incident was a matrimonial dispute between petitioner Jaswant Singh and his wife which had since been amicably resolved. A compromise (Annexure P-2) had been arrived at between the parties and petition for quashing of FIR, on the basis of compromise would shortly be filed. Thus, the petitioners be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail on the ground of serious nature of allegations. 5. Mr. Shubham Kaushik, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 2/complainant and filed his power of attorney. Same is taken on record. He states that respondent No. 2 has no objection, in case the petitioners are granted regular bail. 6. Petitioners are in custody w.e.f. 01.04.2026 i.e. for the last 03 months and 13 days. It is a no injury case. Investigation of the case is complete. Trial may take some time to conclude. In the facts and circumstances of the case, but without a comment on merits, the petition is allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail subject to their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 7. Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 16.07.2026 Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.17 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document