CRM-M-50645-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 CRM-M-50645-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.09.2026 KARANDEEP SINGH @ KANNA ....Petitioner VS STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondents(s) CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN Present : Mr. Rajinder Yadav, Advocate for Mr. H.S. Rakhra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab. ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been inter alia filed praying for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case arising out of same FIR No.205 dated 27.06.2026, under Sections 309(2), 317 (2), 3(5) of BNS (corresponding Sections 390, 411, 34 IPC) and Sections 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Maqboolpura, District Amritsar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the FIR was initially registered against an unknown person. However, on the basis of secret information, the present petitioner along with Gursharan Singh @ Gursharn Singh, were nominated in the FIR, and thereafter one co-accused, namely Manpreet Singh@Bobby, was also arrested. Learned counsel further submit that the identification of the petitioner has not been established by the complainant. It is also submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise, which has been annexed as Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-49969- 2026. As per the said compromise, the complainant has stated that he cannot identify the accused-persons in the present case. It is further submitted that the DEEPAK PATWAL 2026.09.11 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-50645-2026 (O&M) 2 challan has already been presented before the concerned trial Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner is stated to have clean antecedents and has already undergone the custody of more than 02 months 10 days. 3. Learned State counsel has also filed custody certificate of the petitioner and as per which, petitioner is in custody for last more than 02 months 1 days. However, learned State counsel does not deny the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedents and undergone custody period of more than 02 months 10 days. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the record carefully. 5. Considering the fact that petitioner is in custody for last more than 02 months 10 days coupled with the facts that matter has been compromised between the parties and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. Accordingly, the petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. 6. In light of above, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition stands allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, if not required in any other case, on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall declare his ordinary place of residence and the mobile number used by him. ii. The petitioner will not switch off his mobile and in case of any technical glitch, he has to give an alternate number, which will be available in his absence. iii. The petitioner will mark his presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to mark his presence, he DEEPAK PATWAL 2026.09.11 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-50645-2026 (O&M) 3 is permitted to make an application before the Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. iv. The petitioner will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court, for which he will submit the copy of his passport also. However, in case the petitioner does not possess a passport, then they shall file an undertaking to the said effect before being released. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. 7. However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be considered as parity qua any other co-accused in any manner whatsoever. 8. It is further made clear that, in case, the petitioner is found involved in any such activity once again, the State is at liberty to promptly move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of conditions of bail. 09. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (ALOK JAIN) 11.09.2026 JUDGE Deepak Patwal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether reportable Yes/No DEEPAK PATWAL 2026.09.11 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document