[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
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.
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;
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;
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
