CRM-M/25745/2026 of SUKHWINDER SINGH ALIAS LEADER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 3 September 2026

1. This petition has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 [Erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.] praying for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 86 dated 14.06.2024 under Sections 307,341,427,148 and 149 of the IPC (corresponding Sections RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh

109,126,324,191(2), 190 of BNS, 2023) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act registered at Police Station Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Taranjit Singh. He alleged that on 14.06.2024 at about 9:30 a.m., Sukhpreet Singh @ Sukhi Baba received a call from Ramandeep Singh @ Ramna, asking him to come to Aroma Hotel, Talwandi Sabo, as they had to leave for Bathinda. Accordingly, the complainant, Sukhpreet Singh and their friends travelled in a Skoda car, while Ramna and his companions followed in another vehicle. At about 10:30 a.m., near Gas Cattlege, Talwandi Sabo, the Skoda car was allegedly hit from behind by a Figo car driven by Sukhwinder Singh @ Leader i.e. the present petitioner, while a Scorpio driven by Sandeep Singh @ Jassi blocked their way. The accused, along with Rajveer Singh Maan, Amrit Romana, Toti Singh, Reetha Singh and 4–5 unidentified persons, were armed with firearms and other weapons. It is alleged that Jassi fired at Ramna, and during the ensuing scuffle Ramna snatched his pistol. Thereafter, petitioner fired a 12-bore rifle shot at Sukhpreet Singh with the intention to kill, causing firearm injuries to his left ribs, left arm, right wrist and hand and he allegedly fired 5–7 rounds in the air after collecting cartridges from his companions, while the remaining accused assaulted Ramna with swords, baseball bats and wooden sticks. The accused thereafter fled from the spot, and injured Sukhpreet Singh was admitted to Max Hospital and later referred to Adesh Hospital, Bathinda.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and had no motive or prior enmity with the RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh complainant or injured; the dispute was between co-accused Sandeep Singh Jassi and the injured party. He further submits that although a licensed 12-bore gun was recovered from the petitioner, there is no FSL report showing that it was used in the occurrence. It is further submitted tht the Investigation is complete, challan has been presented, the petitioner is in custody since 01.09.2025, and co-accused namely Sandeep Singh @ Jassi has been granted concession of regular bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide CRM-M-60431-2024 dated 10.01.2025.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 30 days and is involved in one more case and he has been released on bail in that case. He further submits that out of 44 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far.

6. I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7. After hearing the rival submissions and considering that the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 30 days; out of 44 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far and co-accused has been granted concession of regular bail coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10. It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

11. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. 03.09.2026

(H.S.GREWAL) renu

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh