CRM-M/3800/2026 of JATIN RAO ALIAS JATIN ALIAS PINJER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 27 July 2026

::1:: (154+221) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-3800-2026 (O & M) Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 Jatin Rao @ Jatin @ Pinjer ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Toor, AAG, Punjab. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. CRM-30300-2026 This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS for placing on record the zimni orders dated 18.02.2026 onwards (Annexure P-8). For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the zimni orders dated 18.02.2026 onwards (Annexure P-8) is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place.

::2:: CRM-M-3800-2026 The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.162 dated 10.12.2024 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and (Section 109 of BNS, 2023 added later on), registered at Police Station Division No.8, Ludhiana, District Ludhiana.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a similarly situated co-accused of the petitioner namely Mahi Gill has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 22.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-22022-2025. As the petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2024 but none of the 14 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of regular bail.

3. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that the petitioner has been attributed a grievous injury on the person of Mohammad Hussain Raza and, therefore, he is not entitle to the concession as prayed for. He, however, concedes that a similarly situated co-accused namely Mahi Gill has already been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 22.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-22022-2025, that the petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2024 but none of the 14 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

::3::

5. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2024 but none of the 14 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial in the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required, moreso, when co- accused namely Mahi Gill has already been granted regular bail by this Court.

6. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Jatin Rao @ Jatin @ Pinjer is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

7. The petitioner 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 he is not involved in any other case/crime other than the case(s) referred to in this order.

8. If any attempt whatsoever is made by the petitioner and/or his family members/friends to contact/threaten/intimidate any of the witnesses of the present occurrence, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

::4::

9. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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 petitioner from Trial without sufficient cause.

10. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE July 27, 2026 vishal Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable :- Yes/No