CRM-M-32604-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 105 CRM-M-32604-2026 Decided on: 28.07.2026 Sawinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Robin Singh Bhullar, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J.(Oral) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483(3) of BNSS read with Section 528 of BNSS seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent Nos. No. 2,3 and 4 namley Lakhwinder Singh, Baljinder Singh and Bhajan Singh @ Bhajan respectively vide common order dated 13.05.2026(P-10) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar in case FIR No. 151 dated 21.06.2024 (P-1), under Sections 302, 120-B, 148, 149 IPC (Sections,103, 61, 191(3), 190 of BNS) and under Sections 25-54-59 of Arms Act, 1959 and under Section 201 IPC (238 BNS) has been added later on, registered at Police Station Jandiala, Ditrict Amritsar. 2. Undisputedly, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were found innocent during the course of investigation, and reliance was placed upon the CCTV footage. Even the learned Court below has recorded its detailed and reasoned findings in paragraph No. 5 of the order dated 04.05.2026, which reads as under: “ As per the inquiry findings so conducted after verifying the CCTV footage, it has been found that at the time of murder of deceased Harpreet Singh @ Lalo was on his Activa, whereas RASHMI 2026.07.29 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32604-2026 2 Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala, Kanwaljit Singh @ Gopi, Sinder Singh and Sandeep Singh @ Sonu Dela reached at the place of incident in the car belonging to Sukhwinder Singh Kala. It is the said factual backdrop that led the Investigating Agency seeking the discharge of applicants Lakhwinder Singh and Baljinder Singh as they were declared innocent and accordingly got them released. During the course of trial, finding existence of sufficient grounds and prima-facie material against the remaining accused facing trial before the court, they were served with charge sheet. Statement of informant was recorded in part. Accordingly, in view of application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (358 BNSS) by the informant duly forwarded by the prosecution, the applicants Lakhwinder Singh, Baljinder Singh and Bhajan Singh have been summoned being additional accused to face trial before the court vide order dated 13.04.2026. As discussed above, applicants Lakhwinder Singh Baljinder Singh have already been arrested. For the sake of repetition, they have been released from custody in accordance with the findings of inquiry officer based on CCTV footage. Similarly, applicant Bhajan Singh was also not found present at the place of alleged incident when the deceased was shot dead. The allegations leveled against applicant Bhajan Singh, who who had allegedly acted as a mediator in order to effect compromise concerning the plot, to have conspired with the co-accused in calling the deceased at the place of incident with an intent to commit his murder are debatable and dependent upon evidence to be led during the course of trial. Accordingly, it is evident that the custodial interrogation of all the applicants is immaterial and shall not serve any purpose. Aceordingly, considering the readiness and willingness of the applicants/accused to join the court proceedings having been summoned subsequent to order passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (358 BNSS), the applicants/accused are directed to surrender before the court within seven days and on doing so, they shall be admitted to bail to satisfaction of court in consonance with requisites of Section RASHMI 2026.07.29 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32604-2026 3 482(2) BNSS (438(2) Cr.P.C.). Copy of order be placed on the files of BA-4282-2026 and BA-4297-2026 and all the bail application files be attached with the main case file pending before this court.” 3. Perusal of the aforesaid findings reveals that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were initially found innocent by the Investigating Agency on the basis of the CCTV footage, and were accordingly discharged from the array of accused during investigation. However, subsequently, during the course of trial, on an application moved under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (Section 358 BNSS) by the complainant, duly forwarded by the prosecution, they were summoned as additional accused vide order dated 13.04.2026. 4. After considering the reasons assigned by the learned Court below and the present stage of the trial, it is evident that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have only been summoned to face trial and their presence is required to be secured during the course of proceedings. At this stage, there is no material available on record, either with the prosecution or with the complainant, which would justify the cancellation of the concession of bail granted in their favour. Order passed by the learned Court below does not suffer from any illegality or perversity warranting interference. Accordingly, no ground for cancellation of bail is made out. Present petition is hereby dismissed. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE July 28, 2026 Rashmi Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RASHMI 2026.07.29 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document