216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 04.12.2025

1. CRM-M-47238-2025 (O&M) GURJIT SINGH ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT

2. CRM-M-55598-2025 (O&M)

GURMEET SINGH ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT

3. CRM-M-55599-2025 (O&M) SUKHWINDER SINGH ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Parneet Singh Pandher, A.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate for the complainant.

1. The petitioners are seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in FIR No.109 dated 25.06.2025, under Sections 307, 118(1), 115(2), 126(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS, 2023, later on reduced offence under Section 307 of BNS and enhaned offence under Section 117(2) of BNS and further enhanced offence under Section 310(2) of BNS, registered at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa, Punjab.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the present petitioners along with three other co-accused had given injuries to the complainant and two other persons.

3. Status report by way of affidavit of Manjeet Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Sardulgarh, District Mansa and custody certificates filed by the State counsel have been taken on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the injuries attributed to the petitioners are simple in nature and hairline fracture of lower leg has been attributed by Kewal Singh to one Gurwinder Singh. The petitioners have undergone custody for a period of more than five months.

5. Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioners on the ground of gravity of allegations. As per the custody certificates, the petitioners have undergone custody for a period of more than 05 months.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. The injuries attributed to the petitioners are simple in nature. Whether the offence under Section 307 IPC is made out or not is also debatable. The petitioners have undergone custody for a period of more than 05 months, the charges have been framed and trial is yet to commence. Continuous detention of the petitioners would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners during the pendency of the trial.

8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

9. It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order the petitioners are found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of their bail.

04.12.2025 JUDGE

Janki