216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.37650 of 2026 Date of decision: 17.07.2026 Lovepreet Singh @ Sonu Katil …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present :- Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. AG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. ***** 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. 101 dated 05.04.2024, registered under Sections 323, 324, 341, 148, 149 IPC wherein Sections 307 and 326 are stated to have been added later-on at Police Station City, Kapurthala. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.03.2024, the complainant, Mainderjit Singh son of Gurnam Singh, was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle being driven by Mittu. When they reached near Chungi Chuharwal, they were intercepted by 6–7 persons armed with datars and swords. While Mittu managed to escape on the motorcycle, the complainant was allegedly assaulted and sustained approximately 10 SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.18 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M No.37650 of 2026 -2- injuries. The accused persons also allegedly snatched his gold chain and mobile phone. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and no specific role or injury is attributed to the accused persons by him. He further submits that there is a delay of 04 days in lodging the present FIR. It is also submitted that the investigation has been conducted and Challan has already been presented in the Court. He also submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 10 months and 18 days and trial is yet to commence in the instant case. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. AG, 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 custody certificate of the petitioner in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 10 months and 18 days. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. 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 10 months and 18 days and that the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.18 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M No.37650 of 2026 -3- trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. 8. 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. 9. 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) 17.07.2026 JUDGE seema Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.18 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment