CRM-M-30497-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 258 CRM-M-30497-2026 (O&M) Date of decision:23.07.2026 Harwinder Singh ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. ... Manisha Batra, J. (Oral). 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.68 dated 21.03.2026, registered under Sections 333, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 351(3), 3(5) and 61(2) of the BNS and Section 27 of the NDPS Act which was added lateron, at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the allegations that on 21.03.2026, at about 05:30 a.m., the complainant – Jaswinder Singh along with his friend Mantosh had came to his shop and after opening the same, when he was cleaning it, suddenly a white coloured car having no number plate reached there. Four unknown youths alighted from the same. They were armed with deadly weapons. They entered inside his shop with an HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30497-2026 (O&M) -2- intent to kill him and had opened an attack upon them with their respective weapons and caused injuries on the person of the complainant and his friend. On clamour being raised, the assailants had fled from the spot after vandalizing goods from the shop and extending threats to the complainant. The complainant Jaswinder Singh and his friend were rushed to the hospital. 3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During the course of investigation and on identification by the complainant, the petitioner along with Gurjeet Singh was arrested. On 31.03.2026, accused Jagdev Singh was arrested in this case. On his interrogation, four more persons, namely, Sukhdeep Singh, Jagtar Singh, Deepi Baba and Pardeep Singh were nominated as additional accused. They were subsequently arrested. They suffered disclosure statements admitting their involvement in the crime. The petitioner was arrested on 24.03.2026. He too suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime. Investigation now stands concluded. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant recorded much after registration of the FIR. He was not named in the FIR. Infact he was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence. His nomination on account of his previous enmity with the complainant is totally on the basis of suspicion. He is in custody since long. The allegations against him are of sending the assailants to launch an attack upon the victim. There is no direct evidence of hatching a conspiracy as against him. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as none out of 30 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. There are no chances of HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30497-2026 (O&M) -3- conclusion of trial in near future. His antecedents are clean. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that the petitioner was an active participant in the conspiracy hatched with the co-accused as he had facilitated the assailants to launch an attack upon the complainant. There are chances of his absconding or intimidating the material witnesses, if extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, argued that he does not deserve to be released on bail. 6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused. The role attributed to him is that of facilitating the assailants to launch an attack upon the complainant, which is distinct from the principal act as attributed to the co-accused. He was not named in the FIR and the linkage sought to be established between the co-accused and himself rests on their disclosure statements and circumstantial inferences. The role so attributed to him is that of a facilitator, which is distinct and remote offence from the direct commission of offence punishable under Section 109 of BNS. It is only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial that any definite conclusion as to his involvement in the commission of subject offences can be drawn. He is in custody since 24.03.2026. Keeping in view the foregoing discussion, particularly the limited role as ascribed to the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that continued detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30497-2026 (O&M) -4- to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned and subject to the following conditions:- (i) he shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date of hearing unless exempted. (ii) he shall not tamper with evidence or attempt to influence witnesses in any manner. (iii) he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. (iv) he shall surrender his passport, furnish details of his cell phone and Aadhar card, and shall not change his mobile number(s) during the pendency of the trial. 8. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 23.07.2026 JUDGE harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document