CRM-M/13444/2026 of GURMINDER SINGH @ GOLDY Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 20 July 2026

1. This petition has been filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of Regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.42, dated 11.05.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered U/ss 341, 323, 452, 506, 148, 149 IPC (now Sections 126(2), 115(2), 333, 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS-2023) (Sections 307, 325, 324 IPC added later on) (now Sections 109, 117(2), 118(1) of BNS-2023, registered at P.S. Maloud, Police District Khanna.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other co-accused, inflicted injuries upon Sukhvir Singh, Karamjit Singh and Gurjit Singh with the intention of causing their death.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and was not present at the place of occurrence. He RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh contends that the petitioner's name was subsequently added as an accused during the course of investigation and that it is still not clear as to how his name surfaced during the investigation. He submits that the prosecution has failed to explain the basis or material on which the petitioner came to be implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the present case is one of version and cross-version. He also points out that a co- accused has already been granted the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. On the strength of the aforesaid submissions, it is prayed that the petitioner be enlarged on regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. Learned State counsel 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 02 years 01 month and 22 days and is not involved in any other case.

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

7. After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last last 02 years 01 month and 22 days; is not involved in any other case; co-accused has been garnted concession of regular bail coupled with the fact that the trial is likely RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh 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.

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.

(H.S.GREWAL) 20.07.2026

JUDGE renu

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh