Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhvir Singh Alias Lakhveer Singh vs State Of Punjab on 26 March, 2025
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
CRM-M-7072-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-7072-2025
Reserved on: 18.03.2025
Pronounced on: 26.03.2025
Lakhvir Singh @ Lakhveer Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. P.K.S.Phoolka, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
78 03.08.2024 Sangat, District 127(1), 115 (2), 118 (1), 3(5) BNS
Bathinda (Section 117(2) and 118(2) of BNS
added later on)
1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court
under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular
bail.
2. In paragraph 6 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal
antecedents.
3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which
reads as follows:
"5. That the brief facts of the case are as follows:- The
complainant Gurtej Singh said that on 31.7.2024, he was
going on his motorcycle. At about 6.00 a.m., when he
reached near the Old age Home, there Gurmit Singh armed
with axe, Kuldeep Singh armed with Kirpan, Charanjit Singh
armed with Gandasa and Lakhvir Singh armed with iron rod
came on a Honda Amaze Car and waylaid him. Gurmit Singh
raised a Lalkara and gave an axe blow, which hit on the
right side of his head, Charanjit Singh gave a Gandasa blow,
which hit on the backside of his shoulder. He fell down.
Lakhvir Singh gave iron rod blow, which hit on his right
arm. Kuldeep Singh gave Kipran blow, which hit on his left
leg below the knee. Gurmit Singh gave another axe blow,
which hit on his right leg, and Lakhvir Singh gave an iron
rod blow, which hit on his left leg, above the ankle. The
accused also gave beatings while he was lying on the
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
CRM-M-7072-2025
ground. He raised the alarm, and people were attracted to
the place of occurrence. After which all the accused fled
away from the spot."
4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and
contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the
petitioner and their family.
5. The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.
6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read
as follows:
"7. That the petitioner played a key role in the entire
incident. As per the statement of the complainant, the
petitioner Lakhvir Singh alias Lakhveer Singh was armed
with an iron rod and he gave two iron rod blows to the
complainant. 1st blow hit on the right arm and 2nd hit on the
left leg of the complainant and both these injuries are
grievous in nature."
REASONING:
7. There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged
crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction
sentencing.
8. As per the Custody Certificate dated 10.02.2025, the petitioner is in custody since
24.12.2024 and his custody is around 03 months.
9. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the
primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case,
there would be no justifiability for further pre-trial incarceration at this stage.
10. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar
to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail.
This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official
webpage.
11. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the
petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds
to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest
Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must
be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.
12. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the
following personal identification details:
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
CRM-M-7072-2025
1. AADHAR number
2. Passport number (If available) and when the
attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or
considers the accused a flight risk.
3. Mobile number (If available)
4. E-Mail id (If available)
13. This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms.
14. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the
concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence,
influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any
witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the
Court.
15. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the
victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be
competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves
for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so.
16. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner
indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an application for cancellation
of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail.
17. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the
case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.
18. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any
Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the
official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants
to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may
download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.
19. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any,
stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
26.03.2025
Jyoti Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
