IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.240 CRM-M-13752-2026 Decided on : 22.04.2026 Vishal alias Khuda ...... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL ***

Present : Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ekom Pal Saggo, AAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

***

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL , J (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.28 dated 22.04.2024, registered under Sections 302, 148, 149 IPC (Sections 201, 202, 34 IPC added lateron) and Section 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Qadian Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner alongwith co-accused persons committed murder of one Sahil (son of the complainant). Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and he has no concern with the said offence. He further contends that there is no direct evidence to connect the petitioner with the said offence. Learned counsel contends that the CCTV footage collected during investigation clearly shows that the death took place in the house of Bobby as he was seen coming out of his house with one dead body and one woman was helping him in loading the said dead body. It has also been contended that the complainant and other material witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile. To lend force to his contention, he has drawn the attention of this Court to the statements of PW1 complainant-Jeeta (Annexure P-7), PW2 Paramjit Kaur (mother of the deceased) (Annexure P-8) and PW3 Joginder Kumar (Annexure P-9), made before the trial Court wherein none of them have supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. Learned counsel submits that co- accused Rani, Manjit Singh alias Jajji and another, Sumit Kumar alias Sumit alias Ghung and Raju have already been granted the concession of regular bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 21.11.2024, 04.03.2025, 25.04.2025 and 01.09.2025, passed in CRM-M-43350-2024, CRM-M-827-2025, CRM-M-20380-2025 and CRM-M-35139-2025 respectively. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 25.04.2024 and he has clean antecedents. The investigation in this case is complete, challan stands presented and charges have been framed. Learned counsel further submits that out of 21 prosecution witnesses, only 04 have been examined till date. He further submits that trial will take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind bars. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate as well as status report which are taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. However, he could not controvert the fact that the petitioner is the first time offender as he is not involved in any other case.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year 11 months and 25 days; the complainant and other material witnesses have been declared hostile; co-accused have already been granted the concession of regular bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court; the investigation in this case is complete; challan stands presented; charges have been framed; out of 21 prosecution witnesses, only 04 have been examined till date and the fact that trial may take a long time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petiti