Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/8730/2026 of MANGA MASIH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 10 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8730-2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 MANGA MASIH ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CRM-M-9832-2026 JAGMEET SINGH @ JAGGI BHALWAN @ JAGGI ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CRM-M-15980-2026 LOVE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CRM-M-8730-2026 -1-
(219) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8730-2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 MANGA MASIH ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CRM-M-9832-2026 JAGMEET SINGH @ JAGGI BHALWAN @ JAGGI ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CRM-M-15980-2026 LOVE MASIH ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-8730-2026. Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate and Mr. Parashar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-9832-2026. Mr. Manoj R. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-15980-2026. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. This order shall dispose of three petitions bearing No.CRM- M-8730-2026 titled as Manga Masih versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-9832- 2026 titled as Jagmeet Singh @ Jaggi Bhalwan @ Jaggi Versus State of JITESH LAL
CRM-M-8730-2026 -2- Punjab and CRM-M-15980-2026 titled as Love Masih Versus State of Punjab as the same are arising out of the same FIR. However, for the sake of convenience the facts have been taken from CRM-M-8730-2026.
2. The prayer in the present petitions under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.41 dated 25.04.2023 registered under Sections 307, 34, 120-B IPC, 1860 and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act at Police Station Dhariwal, District Gurdaspur.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that no one is named in the FIR. However, during the course of investigation, Jagmeet Singh @ Jaggi Bhalwan @ Jaggi (petitioner in CRM-M-9832-2026), Piara Masih @ Shooter, Manga Masih (petitioner in CRM-M-8730-2026) and Love Masih (petitioner in CRM-M-15980-2026) were nominated as accused. Thereafter, Piara Masih @ Shooter, who is alleged to have fired upon the injured along with Manga Masih, has already been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure P-2). As the petitioners are in custody since 18.08.2023, 27.02.2024 and 18.08.2024 respectively but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. Therefore, they are entitled to the concession of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that all the petitioners are serial offenders with multiple other cases pending against them. They are not entitled to the concession of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioners are in custody since 18.08.2023, 27.02.2024 and JITESH LAL
CRM-M-8730-2026 -3- 18.08.2024 respectively but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far and that a co-accused namely Piara Masih @ Shooter has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure P-2).
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioners and their co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioners are in custody since 18.08.2023, 27.02.2024 and 18.08.2024 respectively but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioners is not required moreso when a co-accused namely Piara Masih @ Shooter has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 20.01.2026 (Annexure P-2).
7. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petitions are allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
8. The petitioners shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that they are not involved in any other crime other than the present case. JITESH LAL
CRM-M-8730-2026 -4-
9. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.
10. In addition, the petitioners (or anyone on their behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioners from trial without sufficient cause.
11. The petitions stand disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 10.09.2026 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL