Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 29 April, 2026
CRM-M-2117-2026 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
224
CRM-M-2117-2026 (O&M)
Decided on: 29.04.2026
LAKHWINDER SINGH ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA
Present:Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate for the petitioner.
****
SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.178 dated 13.11.2025 under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 324(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS, registered at Police Station Sadar Moga, District Moga.
2. The present FIR was registered against the present petitioner on the complaint of Manjinder Singh, who alleged that on 12.11.2025 at about 11.30 p.m., he, along with his friend Gauravpreet, was returning to their house on foot from their fields, when one Swift car stopped in front of them and another vehicle stopped behind them. Thereafter, Manjot Singh armed with sword, his brother Happy also armed with sword and Lakhwinder Singh (the present petitioner) armed with baseball bat, alongwith other unidentified persons armed with sticks, alighted from the vehicle and encircled them. It is alleged that co-accused, namely, Manjot Singh first inflicted a sword blow upon the complainant, which he attempted to ward off, resulting in injury on finger of his right hand. SONIA PURI 2026.05.01 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-2117-2026 (O&M) -2- Thereafter co-accused, namely, Happy inflicted another sword blow which hit near the wrist of his right arm followed by another blow by co- accused. Manjot Singh hit the complainant on his head. When the complainant's friend, namely, Gauravpreet Singh intervened to the rescue of complainant, co-accused Manjot Singh gave another sword blow, which hit on back of Gauravpreet Singh. Then Happy inflicted three sword blows upon Gauravpreet Singh, which hit on his left shoulder and below the knee of both the legs. In the meantime, Harmanpreet Singh, arrived at the spot and attempted to rescue them; however, he was too attacked by Manjot Singh and his brother Happy. Subsequently, co- accused, namely, Jasvir Singh @ Bagga and Sukhpreet Singh @ Sukha arrived on a tractor-trolley and gave slaps to them and Jasvir Singh alias Bagga broke the rear glass of the vehicle of Harmanpreet Singh. On raising alarm, the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons, on their vehicles.
The motive behind the occurrence is stated to be an altercation having been taken place between the complainant and co- accused namely, Jasvir Singh a few days prior to the alleged occurrence.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case; no injury is attributed to him; the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than 05 months; investigation has been completed in this case and the challan has been filed. It is further contended that a compromise has been effected between the parties; the petitioner is having clean & clear antecedents; SONIA PURI 2026.05.01 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-2117-2026 (O&M) -3- trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars; as such, prayed for concession of regular bail.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Ms. Navjot Kaur, Advocate has put in appearance and filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record and admitted the factum of compromise having been arrived at, between the parties. She further submitted that she has no objection, in case the concession of regular bail is granted to the petitioner.
6. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and by way of filing of custody certificate dated 28.04.2026, opposed the concession of regular bail to the petitioner while submitting that the present petitioner alongwith co-accused caused injuries to the complainant. However, it is admitted that the investigation is complete and final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has already been filed before the trial Court.
7. Heard.
8. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the present case and the rival contentions of the parties, this Court finds merit in the present petition on the following aspects:
(I) the petitioner has been in custody for the last 05 months & 13 days;
(II) No injury has been attributed to the present petitioner; (III) Investigation has been completed & challan has been filed; SONIA PURI 2026.05.01 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-2117-2026 (O&M) -4- trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment as culpability is to be decided by trial Court after appreciating evidence adduced by the parties, and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.
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 bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
10. Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the main case.
(SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 29.04.2026 Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO SONIA PURI 2026.05.01 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document