Dismissed¶34

Harjeet Singh Alias Enki v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2025CRM-M/15457/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail refused under S.483 BNSS; BNS 2023 Ss.103, 3(5), 304, 61(2); FIR 0078 dated 08.07.2024 P.S. Maur District Bathinda; gandasa murder of Jaspal Singh @ Athani; conspiracy with co-accused; facilitation of escape in petitioner's car; causing disappearance of offence; custody since 14.07.2024; trial commenced; CRM-M 15457 of 2025; High Court of Punjab and Haryana; Manisha Batra, J.; decision 27.05.2025; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused, facilitated their flight from the spot after the assault and facilitated causing disappearance of the offence of murder; there are specific allegations against him which are grave in nature, counting against release. ¶29

Harjeet Singh Alias Enki Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Harjeet Singh alias Enki, in custody since 14.07.2024 in FIR No. 0078 dated 08.07.2024 (P.S. Maur, District Bathinda; Sections 103, 3(5), 304 and 61(2) BNS 2023, arising from the gandasa assault and death of Jaspal Singh @ Athani), should be granted regular bail under Section 483 BNSS.

¶14

Court's answer

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Weighing the nature of the allegations, the severity of the punishment to be awarded and the attendant facts and circumstances, the court held that the petitioner does not deserve the benefit of bail and accordingly dismissed the petition.

¶34

Key takeaways

Since the trial had commenced and nothing on record showed any undue delay in its conclusion, the petitioner's prolonged-trial/custody argument did not weigh in favour of bail.ratio¶30
It is clarified that the observations made in the order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal bail – refusal. Harjeet Singh alias Enki, arrested 14.07.2024 in FIR No. 0078 dated 08.07.2024, P.S. Maur, District Bathinda, charged under Sections 103, 3(5), 304 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for the gandasa assault and death of Jaspal Singh @ Athani, sought regular bail under Section 483 BNSS (CRM-M No.15457 of 2025). The petitioner, not an assailant, was alleged to have conspired with the co-accused, remained present in his car with ignition on to enable them to flee the spot after the fatal assault, and thereby facilitated causing disappearance of the offence of murder; the car used was recovered at his instance and investigation stood completed with trial commenced. Holding the specific allegations grave, the punishment severe, and foreseeing no undue delay in trial, Manisha Batra, J. declined bail and dismissed the petition, clarifying that the observations were not an expression of opinion on the merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

239

¶3

CRM-M No.15457 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.05.2025

¶4

Harjeet Singh alias Enki

... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

¶10

Present: Mr. Arshpreet Khadial, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State.

¶12

¶13

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

¶14

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in the FIR mentioned below:-

¶15

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Sections
0078	08.07.2024	Maur, District Bathinda	103, 3(5), 304 and
			61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”)
2.	Brief facts	relevant for the purpose	of disposal of this

¶16

petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Sukhpal Singh on 08.07.2024 alleging therein that he was a driver by profession. On 07.07.2024, he

¶17

MANJU 2025.05.29 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh

¶18

-2-

¶19

CRM-M No.15457 of 2025

¶20

was present in the truck union. On hearing some noises, he came outside and found three youths while assaulting his younger brother Jaspal Singh @ Athani. They were inflicting injuries on his person with gandasas while he was lying on the ground. The complainant identified them as Harpeet Singh, Jaspreet Singh and Gurdeep Singh. He rushed for rescue of his brother and then the assailants fled away. The injured was rushed to the hospital but he succumbed to the injuries and was declaed to be brought dead.

¶21

After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. Postmortem examination of dead body of the victim was conducted. Subsequently, the complainant recorded supplementary statement on the basis of which offence under Section 304 of BNS was added and the petitioner was nominated as an accused on the allegations that he had assisted the co-accused in fleeing from the spot in a car belonging to him. The petitioner was arrested and is in custody since 14.07.2024. The car used in the crime was recovered at his instance. The co-accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed.

¶22

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded five days after the incident. The statements of witnesses examined by the prosecution with regard to the colour of the car in which the co-accused were taken are contradictory and it is debatable as to which car was used by the assailants. The petitioner is not the registered owner of the car which is alleged to have been recovered from him. He is in

¶23

MANJU 2025.05.29 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh

¶24

-3-

¶25

CRM-M No.15457 of 2025

¶26

custody since long. The trial is likely to take considerable ime to conclude. No specific overt act leading to murder of the victim has been attributed to him. He has clean antecedents. The ingredients for commission of offence under Section 103 of BNS are not attracted against him at all. Therefore, it is urged that he deserves to be released on bail.

¶27

Status report has been filed. It is argued by learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab that the petitioner played an active role in the crime as he assisted the escape of the co-accused who had assaulted the victim and had extended fatal injuries, by making them flee from the spot in a car belonging to him and also facilitated him by staying near the place of occurrence in his vehicle. This car was purchased by him on the basis of an affidavit from the registered owner. The allegations against him are serious in nature. As such, it is urged that the petitioner does not deserve to be given concession of bail.

¶28

This Court has considered the rival submissions.

¶29

The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, he is alleged to have accompanied the co-accused and while remaining present in his car and keeping its ignition on, he facilitated the other co-accused to flee from the spot after assaulting the victim. In this manner, he is also alleged to have facilitated causing disappearance of offence of murder by the co-accused. There are specific allegations against him which are grave in nature. The

¶30

trial has commenced and there is nothing on record to show that there would

¶31

MANJU 2025.05.29 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh

¶32

-4-

¶33

CRM-M No.15457 of 2025

¶34

be any undue delay in conclusion thereof. Keeping in view the nature of the allegations, severity of the punishment to be awarded and the attendant facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

¶35

It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶36

This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court’s official webpage.

¶37

(MANISHA BATRA) 27.05.2025 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶38

MANJU 2025.05.29 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh

Harjeet Singh Alias Enki v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harjeet Singh Alias Enki v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narinder Kumar Joshi Vs Director General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence

Bittu Kumar Alias Bittu Vs State of Haryana

Gulam Mustafa Daar Vs State of Haryana

Bal Bahadur Sharki Vs State of Haryana

Rahul Alias Rahul Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Alok Vs State of Haryana