CRM-M/34402/2026 of VIKRAMJEET SINGH ALIAS SHINDA 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. 22, Dated 03.02.2025, U/s 109, 115(2), 351(3), 191(3), 190 BNS, 2023, (307,323,506,148,149 IPC) Section 25 (Section 54, 59 of the Arms Act, 1959 added later on) registered at Police Station- Dugri, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Abhijit Singh Mand, who alleged that he and his friend Ankush were surrounded at Jeta Chowk by the petitioner and co-accused namely Munis @ Tony, Sumit, Rahul Kang, Mandeep @ Dikki, and 2–3 unknown persons. During the assault, Munis @ Tony allegedly fired at the complainant with intent to kill, but the bullet struck the bandage/cloth on RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh his right leg. Thereafter, the accused threatened to kill them and fled on motorcycles.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and has not committed any offence. It is contended that the allegations in the FIR are false and no specific role has been attributed to him. The petitioner is in custody since 25.09.2025 and, therefore, seeks grant of regular bail.

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 02 days. He further submits that out of 14 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. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 02 days; out of 14 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose 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. RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh

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. 03.09.2026

(H.S.GREWAL) renu

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

Chandigarh