CRM-M/11892/2026 of RAJINDER SINGH ALIAS HAPPY ALIAS THATTA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 17 July 2026

CRM-M-11892-2026 -1- 214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11892-2026 Date of Decision: 17.07.2026 RAJINDER SINGH ALIAS HAPPY @ THATTA ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Gurnoor Singh Sethi, Advocate, Ms. Jyotnoor Kaur, Advocate and Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kuljinder Singh Dhindsa, AAG, Punjab. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.153 dated 25.11.2024 registered under Sections 109 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (Section 249 of BNS, 2023 added later on) and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR would reveal that the petitioner has been named on suspicion alone. The complainant has not disclosed as to how he had come to know the name of the petitioner and other accused. A .32 bore pistol purportedly used by the petitioner in the occurrence has been recovered from him when he was arrested in another case. There is no connection between the said pistol and the present case inasmuch as there is no FSL report to the effect that the KUSUM

CRM-M-11892-2026 -2- pistol has been used in the present occurrence. As the petitioner is in custody since 27.04.2025 but none of the 17 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 bail.

3. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the petitioner is a habitual offender and is an accused in as many as 18 other cases. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail as prayed for. He, however concedes that other than the present FIR, there is no other case registered by the present complainant against the petitioner. He also concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 27.04.2025 but none of the 17 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.

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

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 27.04.2025 but none of the 17 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required.

6. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner-Rajinder Singh @ Happy @ Thatta S/o Puran Singh 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. KUSUM

CRM-M-11892-2026 -3-

7. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any at- tempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

8. 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 crime other than the cases mentioned in this order.

9. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- 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) 17.07.2026 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No KUSUM