Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of the petitioner on regular bail subject to furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned, without any expression of opinion on the merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 14.05.2025 in case FIR No.0032 dated 03.06.2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Abohar, District Fazilka, should be granted regular bail.

Court's answer

Because the case is one of version and cross version in which both parties received injuries and the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature, the Court deemed it appropriate to release the petitioner on regular bail.

Ratio / Principle

Without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the case, it was ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Key takeaways

The petition was allowed.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted — Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab, CRM-M-31660-2025 (O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, Deepak Manchanda J. (oral), 04.06.2025. Petitioner in custody since 14.05.2025 in case FIR No.0032 dated 03.06.2024, Police Station Sadar Abohar, District Fazilka (Ss. 324, 323, 34 IPC; S. 326 IPC added later on). The Court held it to be a case of version and cross version in which both parties had received injuries and the injury attributed to the petitioner was simple in nature, and accordingly deemed it appropriate to release him on regular bail on furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned, expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits. An accompanying application (CRM-23691-2025) under S. 528 read with S. 483 BNSS for 20 days' interim bail to attend the bhog ceremony of the petitioner's wife Balwinder Kaur (expired 25.05.2025) was not pressed.

CRM-M-31660-2025(O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

129 CRM-M-31660-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.06.2025

Amrik Singh

... Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present: Mr. Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate for for the petitioner.

Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab. ****

DEEPAK MANCHANDA, J.(Oral)

CRM-23691-2025

This application has been filed under Section 528 read with Section 483 of BNSS for grant of interim bail for a period of 20 days to the petitioner in case FIR No.0032 dated 03.06.2024 under Sections 324, 323 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 326 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar Abohar, District Fazilka to enable him to attend the bhog ceremony of his wife, namely, Balwinder Kaur, who expired on 25.05.2025.

The same is not pressed.

Main case

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner, however, contends that the allegations against the petitioner are that he was armed with tamba and the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature, whereas later on Section 326 IPC was added and the same is attributed to the other co-accused, namely, Amritpal, who is still in custody.

VANITA 2025.06.04 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order and judgment

CRM-M-31660-2025(O&M) 2

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 14.05.2025 and it is a case of version and cross version, where the petitioner has also received injury i.e. fracture of proximal phalanx of little finger. In support of his argument, he has placed reliance upon MLR of the petitioner annexed as Annexure P-3. He prays for granting bail.

Learned State counsel does not dispute the aforesaid fact.

Heard.

Keeping in view the above and the fact that it is a case of version and cross version where both the parties have received injuries and the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature, this Court deems it appropriate to release the petitioner on regular bail.

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the case, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.

The petition is allowed.

(DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE

04.06.2025

vanita
	Whether speaking/reasoned :	Yes	No
	Whether Reportable :	Yes	No

VANITA 2025.06.04 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order and judgment