CRM-M-26125-2026 1 215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26125-2026 Date of Decision: 16.07.2026 INDERJIT SINGH ALIAS INDERJEET SINGH ALIAS HAPPY ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Dhiraj Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 209 dated 30.11.2025, initially registered under Sections 109, 115(2), 303(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 307, 323, 379, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860). During the course of investigation, Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) was also added. 2. The prosecution case, as emanating from FIR No. 209 dated 30.11.2025 registered at Police Station City-1, Sangrur, District Sangrur, is that the FIR came to be registered on the statement of complainant Gurwinder Singh. It is alleged that on the intervening night of the occurrence, after closing his salon, the complainant along with his friend Aman was proceeding towards his house on a scooty. When they reached near the overbridge behind Police Station City-1, Sangrur, two persons riding a white scooty, namely KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26125-2026 2 Shabby and Happy @ Inderjeet Singh, allegedly intercepted them and snatched the complainant's Vivo mobile phone before fleeing from the spot. 2.1 It is further alleged that the complainant and his friend chased the accused persons and reached near the house of Shabby, where, upon demanding the return of the mobile phone, Shabby allegedly assaulted the complainant with an iron rod. Thereafter, another person, namely Shibu, along with others, allegedly emerged from the house and inflicted multiple injuries upon the complainant with iron rods on various parts of his body. It is also alleged that the accused persons took away the complainant's scooty, which was subsequently found abandoned near Gurudwara Ravi Dass Sahib, Sangrur. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present FIR was registered under Sections 109, 115(2), 303(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and during the course of investigation, Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was also added. After completion of investigation, the challan has been presented before the learned Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that although the petitioner has been named in the FIR as Happy @ Inderjeet Singh, a bare perusal of the FIR would reveal that the only allegation against him is that he allegedly snatched the complainant's mobile phone while riding as a pillion rider on the scooty driven by co-accused Gursewak Sharma @ Shabby. It is submitted that no specific injury or overt act of assault has been attributed to the petitioner. The allegations of inflicting injuries with an iron rod have been specifically levelled against co-accused Shabby and Shibu. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26125-2026 3 3.1 Learned counsel further submits that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and nothing remains to be recovered from him. The investigation has already been completed and the challan stands presented before the learned Trial Court. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 30.11.2025 and his further custodial interrogation is no longer required. 3.2 It is further argued that the principal accused, namely Gursewak Sharma @ Shabby, who is alleged to have inflicted the head injury upon the complainant, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 30.03.2026 in CRM-M-4614-2026. The petitioner, whose role is comparatively less serious, is also entitled to the concession of regular bail on the ground of parity. 3.3 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case, has clean antecedents, has never been declared a proclaimed offender and undertakes to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner shall neither tamper with the prosecution evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate dated 15.07.2026, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has already undergone a total custody period of 06 months and 04 days. 6. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail and submits that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR as Happy and KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26125-2026 4 has been attributed the role of snatching the mobile phone of the complainant while accompanying co-accused Shabby. 6.1 Learned State counsel further submits that the complainant sustained multiple injuries during the occurrence, including an injury declared dangerous to life, resulting in addition of Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Considering the nature and gravity of allegations and the role attributed to the petitioner, he does not deserve the concession of regular bail at this stage. 7. Be that as it may, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, the fact that the investigation stands concluded, the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court, and the petitioner is no longer required for any further custodial interrogation, this Court finds that his continued incarceration is not likely to serve any useful purpose. It is further evident that the charges have already been framed; however, none of the prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and, therefore, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is also taken into consideration that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, has not been declared a proclaimed offender, and the principal accused/co-accused, namely Gursewak Sharma @ Shabby, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. In such circumstances, keeping the petitioner behind bars for an indefinite period would not be justified. 8. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2018 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that grant of bail is the rule and KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26125-2026 5 refusal thereof is an exception, and that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is further submitted that the right to speedy trial forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same has been consistently recognised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including in Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another (SLO (Crl.) No. 8523/2024). In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial can be effectively safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency. 2. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall attempt, directly or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. 3. The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. 4. The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the petitioner his permanent residential address as well as present KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26125-2026 6 correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. 5. The petitioner shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 6. The petitioner shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change. 7. The petitioner shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or his unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest. 16.07.2026 (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) kv JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.17 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh