Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/37106/2026 of DIMPLE KUMAR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 15 July 2026
(O&M) 217(2) THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37106-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.07.2026 DIMPLE KUMAR …Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB …Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal Present: Ms. Amandeep Kaur,
217(2)
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-37106-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision : 15.07.2026
DIMPLE KUMAR
…Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
…Respondent
Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal Present:
Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Advocate
and Mr. Harish Mehla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG Punjab.
***
SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J.
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.
1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 217 dated 28.11.2025 under Sections 109, 124(1), 132, 121(1), 115(2), 118(1), 326(G), 125(A), 126(2), 221, 226, 190, 191(3), 195(1), 285, 287, 288, 324(3), 351(3), 62 and 57 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 5 of Punjab Prevention of Damage to Public and Private Property Act, 2014, Police Station Sangrur District Sangrur. This is the first petition for regular bail.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case on account of his association with workers’ union and participation in the protest organized by the union, for redressal of grievances and legitimate demands. It is argued that petitioner joined the protest along with numerous other workers and office bearers of the union and had no intention, whatsoever to commit any offence. Five co-accused namely Gurjit Singh @ Happy, Ramandeep Singh, Jora Singh and Manpreet Singh and Gurpreet Singh, against whom identical allegations were levelled, had since been allowed regular bail by this Court on 15.06.2026, 23.06.2026 and 24.06.2026 and 07.07.2026. Petitioner was AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.16 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document in custody w.e.f. 28.11.2025. Trial was at initial stage. Petitioner, thus, deserved to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for regular bail submitting that though, petitioner was one of the members of the unlawful assembly and no specific role or injury was attributed to him, he was named in the FIR and one of the members of unlawful assembly even poured petrol on the complainant and caused him injuries.
4. Petitioner is in custody since 28.11.2025. He is alleged to be a part of the unlawful assembly, which was raising protest. There is no specific attribution to the petitioner. Act of pouring petrol on Inspector Jasveer Singh is attributed to co-accused Sukhjinder Singh @ Seepa. Injuries suffered by Inspector Jasveer are simple. Investigation of the case is complete. Challan has been presented in the Court. Petitioner, undisputedly, has clean antecedents. Co-accused Gurjit Singh @ Happy, Ramandeep Singh, Jora Singh, Manpreet Singh and Gurpreet Singh have already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court. Case against petitioner is at par. In the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the period of custody undergone, but without a comment on merits, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
5. Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 15.07.2026 Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.16 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document