CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 226 CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.07.2026 Jamla Singh @ Pushpinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. G. S. Nahel, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sourabh Singla, Advocate for the complainant. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.248 dated 18.11.2025, registered under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 351(1), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (Section 117(2) of BNS added later on) at Police Station Samana, District Patiala. 2. As per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant and the petitioner are close relatives owning adjoining agricultural land with a common boundary. A dispute had arisen after the boundary was damaged while ploughing the fields. On the previous day i.e.17.11.2025, the complainant had gone along with his driver Goga Singh to restore the boundary by putting soil over it. However, when at about 4:30 p.m., the complainant and his driver were returning to the village on a motorcycle and MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) -2- reached near the canal culvert, the petitioner armed with a gandasi, and his son Simra Singh, armed with a kirch, intercepted them. It was further alleged that the petitioner struck the complainant on the forehead with the gandasi with an intention to kill him and thereafter gave another blow with its reverse side after he fell down. His son Simra Singh inflicted repeated blows on the complainant's head and nose with the kirch and subsequently caused an injury on his left flank. When driver Goga Singh intervened, he was pushed aside. On the complainant raising an alarm, villagers gathered, whereupon both the accused fled from the spot while extending threats to kill him in future. The complainant was initially taken to Civil Hospital, Samana and was thereafter shifted to Rajindra Hospital and subsequently to Park Hospital, Patiala for treatment. During investigation, the police obtained the MLR, which reflected eight injuries on the person of the complainant and later on, after receipt of the opinion declaring one of the injuries grievous, Section 117(2) BNS was added. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in a case arising out of a long-standing land boundary dispute between close relatives and that the dispute has been given a criminal colour. There are multiple contradictions in the version of the complainant. Although he alleged that his driver Goga Singh was assaulted but no injury has been attributed to him. It is further argued that the investigation stands concluded and challan has already been presented. His son has been found to be innocent and this shows falsity of the version of complainant. As per discharge summary of the private hospital, the complainant was presented with history of road side accident. The petitioner has remained in custody since MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) -3- 19.11.2025. His custodial interrogation is no longer required. He has clean antecedents. Conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him into custody anymore. Therefore, it is urged that the petitioner deserves to be granted the concession of regular bail. 4. Status report and the custody certificate have been filed. Learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has argued that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner. He has inflicted several blows on the head of the complainant with a deadly weapon. The assault was brutal and was carried out with the intention to eliminate the complainant. The injuries sustained by the complainant are duly supported by the medical record and two of the injuries have subsequently been declared grievous, leading to the addition of Section 117(2) BNS. The victim and two other material witnesses have been partly examined. The petitioner has ben extending threats to them even. There are chances of his further intimidating the prosecution witnesses. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner along with co-accused Samar Singh, who is his son, is alleged to have intercepted the complainant and to have inflicted blow on his head with a gandasi. His son is alleged to have caused injuries on the head and nose of the complainant with a kirch. The investigation in the present case stands concluded and the final report has already been presented before the Court. It is not in dispute that the co-accused, namely Samar Singh, who is the son of the petitioner and against whom specific allegations were levelled in the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) -4- FIR, has been found innocent during the course of investigation. Though the complainant is stated to have suffered multiple injuries, none of the injuries has been declared to be dangerous to life attracting Section 109 of BNS. The petitioner has remained in custody since 19.11.2025. His custodial interrogation is no longer required. The trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, particularly when out of total 23, only 03 prosecution witnesses have been examined, that too partly. The apprehension expressed by the learned State counsel and learned counsel for the complainant regarding intimidation of witnesses can be adequately addressed by imposing appropriate conditions while granting bail. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody anymore. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. The concession of bail shall, however, remain subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing unless specifically exempted from appearance; (ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the complainant or any prosecution witness so as to dissuade them from disclosing the true facts before the Court or the investigating agency; (iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or attempt to influence the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22790-2026 (O&M) -5- witnesses in any manner; (iv) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the learned trial Court; (v) The petitioner shall furnish his mobile number to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same operational at all times during the pendency of the trial. In the event of any change in his mobile number or residential address, the same shall be intimated to the Investigating Officer as well as the learned trial Court forthwith. 7. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is found to have misused the concession of bail or violated any of the aforesaid conditions, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail granted to him, in accordance with law. 24.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document