[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhwinder Singh Alias Lakha vs State Of Punjab on 29 April, 2026
Author: Rajesh Bhardwaj
Bench: Rajesh Bhardwaj
CRM-M No.22503 of 2026 -1-
252
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.22503 of 2026
Date of Decision: 29.04.2026
Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
Present: Mr. Jagraj Singh, Advocate;
Mr. Buta Singh, Advocate;
Ms. Monika, Advocate and
Ms. Pooja Rani, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Raj Karan Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.
*****
Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)
1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of
regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.200, dated
03.11.2024, under Sections 110, 117(2), 115(2), 3(5), 351(3) of BNS,
2023, registered at Police Station Sadar Hoshiarpur, District Hoshiarpur.
2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present
case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely,
Jaskaran Kumar. It was alleged that he was working as a mason. It was
alleged that he alongwith his family came to his maternal village
Bahadurgarh Bahiya for work. On 27.10.2024, he alongwith his cousin,
namely, Varinder Kumar went to the fields and there near the motor,
they saw Vinod Kumar @ Vinodi, Vijay Kumar @ Sundi, Neeta, Jasveer
@ Ganja, Golu and some other boys were playing cards. The
complainant and his cousin also started playing with them. At about
11:00 p.m., Lakhwinder @ Lakha (petitioner), Davinder Kumar @
Goldy, Dalveer Pal @ Gaini reached there and started playing cards with
them. Later on, Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha and Davinder Kumar @
Goldy stopped playing cards with them, however, Giani @ Dalvir Pal
remained playing cards with them and at about 12.30 A.M on
28.10.2024, Dalvir Pal @ Giani while playing cards started abusing
complainant and his cousin and they were stopped from doing so,
whereupon, Lakhwinder Singh and Davinder Kumar also started having
altercation with the complainant. Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha raised
lalkara to caught hold of them and they be not left undone. Then Giani
grappled complainant. Davinder @ Goldy gave two baseball bat blows
on the head of complainant with an intention to kill him and Lakhwinder
Singh @ Lakha gave danda blows continuously on the complainant
hitting on the right side of his face upper denture, due to which he fell
down. When the complainant was lying on the ground Davinder @
Goldy again gave baseball blow on his lips and mandible, Giano also
gave kicks blows to the complainant. When Varinder (cousin) came
forward to rescue complainant, the assailants gave threats to him and
fled away from the spot. Varinder Kumar (cousin) after making
arrangement of transportation took complainant to Civil Hospital,
Hoshiarpur from where he was referred to IVY Hospital, Hoshiarpur.
Request was made to take legal action against all the accused persons.
On the basis of the same, FIR was registered and on registration of the
FIR, the investigation commenced. On completion of the investigation,
the challan was presented. The petitioner was arrested on 22.01.2026.
The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Hoshiarpur praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after
hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, declined the bail application
filed by the petitioner vide order dated 07.03.2026. Hence being
aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present
petition praying for the grant of regular bail.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, prays for
the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that
of the co-accused, namely, Davinder Kumar @ Goldy and Dalveeer Pal
@ Dalvir Pal @ Giani, who have been granted bail by this Court. He has
drawn the attention of this Court to the orders dated 03.03.2025 and
26.09.2025 passed in CRM-M-10553-2025 and CRM-M-53795-2025,
whereby, co-accused, namely, Davinder Kumar @ Goldy and Dalveeer
Pal @ Dalvir Pal @ Giani have been granted the concession of regular
bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars
since 22.01.2026. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as
he has never been involved in any other case. He has submitted that on
the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail as the
case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said co-accused, who have
already been granted bail by this Court.
4. Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of
bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied
that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Davinder Kumar
@ Goldy and Dalveeer Pal @ Dalvir Pal @ Giani. He, on instructions
has submitted that the investigation is complete. He has produced
custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court which is taken on
record.
5. Heard.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing
the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since
22.01.2026. Co-accused, namely, Davinder Kumar @ Goldy and
Dalveeer Pal @ Dalvir Pal @ Giani are on bail and the case of the
petitioner as stated is at par with them. As submitted before this Court,
the investigation is complete. Custody certificate produced would show
that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 03 months & 06 days
as on 28.04.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved in
any other case.
7. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything
on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both
the sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the
petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner on the basis of parity.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the
petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety
bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
9. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of
opinion on the merits of the case.
(RAJESH BHARDWAJ)
29.04.2026 JUDGE
rittu
Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
