213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 16.04.2026 BALJINDER SINGH ALIAS LALI ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. J.S.Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.33 dated 21.07.2024 registered under Sections 103, 3(5) of BNS at Police Station Nandgarh, Distt. Bathinda, Punjab.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the intervening night of 20/21.07.2024, complainant heard noise of the petitioner who was exclaiming that the son of the complainant Vicky Kumar had been tied up in the house of Sukhpreet Singh. When the complainant, his wife, and son Rinku reached there, the petitioner closed the door of the room. Seeing through a broken window, the complainant saw that Vicky Kumar was tied on a bed with rope, while petitioner armed with a wooden log, Gurmail Singh armed with a spade, Sukhpreet Singh armed with a dang and Lovepreet Singh armed with a wooden log were giving beatings to Vicky Kumar. It is further the case of the prosecution that Sukhpreet Singh kept on beating Vicky Kumar until he died.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the deceased had an illicit relation with the wife of the petitioner, due to which the occurrence had taken place as the deceased had come to the house of the petitioner to meet his wife. The petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 08 months and 22 days. He prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Rohit Hans, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. He further submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 08 months and 22 days and out of total 20 prosecution witnesses, only 08 have been examined so far.

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

7. After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 08 months and 22 days; out of total 20 prosecution witnesses, only 08 have been examined so far; the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

8. Reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pardeep Kumar @ Banu versus State of Punjab, bearing Criminal Appeal No.1341/2026 (arising out of SLP(Cri.) No.18775/2025), decided on 13.03.2026, wherein it has been categorically held that where the accused has remained in custody for a considerable period and the trial has not even commenced, or is not likely to conclude in the near future, therefore, continued incarceration would amount to punishment without trial. In such circumstances, further detention pending trial is not necessary and the accused is entitled to be released on bail.

9. 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 bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

10. It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his