1 CRM-M-49983-2026 (O&M) THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 223 CRM-M-49983-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.09.2026 SUPRINDERJIT SINGH SIDHU …Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB …Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal Present: Mr. Pushp Jain, Advocate, Mr. Chandandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akash Yadav, AAG Punjab. *** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 83 dated 30.06.2026 under Sections 331(6), 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 324(4), 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Cheema, District Sangrur. Offences under Sections 117(2) and 238 BNS were added in the FIR during investigation. This is the first petition for regular bail. 2. Complainant Amandeep Singh stated that on 29.06.2026 at around 11.00 P.M he was sitting in the house of his friend Diljit Singh, where Supinderjit Singh alias Simmi and Gurdeep Singh started calling out his friend Diljit Singh. Diljit Singh went out to open the gate and he accompanied him. He further stated that Diljit Singh opened the gate and Supinderjit Singh and Gurdeep Singh started hurling abuses at him. Supinderjit Singh, who was wearing a punch, attacked him on his nose. When he tried to flee, both assailants gave blows with iron rod on his left shoulder and fled from the spot on their Thar vehicle. He further stated that thereafter, the assailants came to his house along with an unidentified person. Supinderjit Singh and Gurdeep Singh started hitting the gate of the house with rod and gandasa and broke the glasses of his house by hurling AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.09.11 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CRM-M-49983-2026 (O&M) bricks. Motive behind the attack was that he got registered a case against Supinderjit Singh, who was pressurizing him to turn hostile in that case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated for the reason that petitioner raised protest against the complainant, who was habitual of consuming and selling intoxicants in the village. Petitioner was in judicial custody w.e.f. 22.07.2026 i.e. for the last 01 month and 17 days. Investigation in the case was complete. Petitioner had clean antecedents and was not involved in any other case. Co-accused namely Gurdeep Singh had been enlarged on interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 26.08.2026. As such, petitioner was also entitled to grant of regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail arguing that petitioner was attributed grievous injury on nose of the complainant and considering the serious nature of allegations, he was not entitled to release on regular bail. 5. Petitioner is incarcerated w.e.f. 22.07.2026 i.e. for the last 01 month and 17 days. His antecedents are clean. He has roots in the society. There is no reason to suspect that he would evade the process of law. Considering the well recognized principle that bail is the rule and jail an exception, but without a comment on merits, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate. 6. Pending CRM(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 10.09.2026 Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.09.11 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document