Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/41996/2026 of SATWARG ALIAS SATWARAG ALIAS SAGGO Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 18 August 2026
will therefore take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail stating that four other cases stand registered against the petitioner.
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.
Chandigarh
Chandigarh
will therefore take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.
6. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail stating that four other cases stand registered against the petitioner. He submits that if the petitioner is released on bail, he may try to influence and threaten the witnesses and may also abscond.
7. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
8. On 04.08.2026, while noticing that despite charges having been framed as far back as on 07.11.2024, not even a single witness has been examined, this Court had called for a report of the District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar. It has been stated in the said report that till date no witness has been examined as despite repeated summons, the complainant Lovepreet Singh and eye witness Jatinder Singh have not appeared as Jatinder Singh was intentionally evading Court summons/warrants and had refused service, whereas complainant Lovepreet Singh is reported to have left the country. It is on account of this reason that out of 25 witnesses, not even a single witness has been examined.
9. Further co-accused namely Vishal, Jasvir Singh @ Jassa and Taranjit @ Kaalu have already been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench and by this Court vide orders dated 30.04.2025, 20.05.2025 and 02.07.2026. The petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years 02 months and 11 days. The trial will clearly take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in
Chandigarh
custody any longer.
10. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. Rekha
Chandigarh