Gurwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Gurwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused in FIR No. 115 dated 20.07.2023 (Sections 302, 323, 148, 149 IPC, 1860; Section 325 added later), is entitled to grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in this second petition.

Court's answer

The petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR, lodged by the father of the deceased on the statement of the deceased himself while injured, and the petitioner along with other co-accused caused multiple injuries on the person of the deceased.

Ratio / Principle

Keeping in view the gravity of the offence and all the attending circumstances, the petitioner does not qualify for the grant of bail at this stage; the present petition, being denuded of any merit, is dismissed.

Key takeaways

Nothing said in the order shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail – Regular bail – Second petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 – Murder case, FIR No. 115 dated 20.07.2023, P.S. Sadar, Bathinda (Sections 302, 323, 148, 149 IPC, 1860; Section 325 added later) – Deceased Jashandeep Singh assaulted, per FIR, by petitioner Gurwinder Singh @ Guri and co-accused with baseball bats and daang; FIR lodged by father of deceased on the statement of the deceased himself while injured – Petitioner specifically named in FIR; in custody since 23.07.2023 – Earlier bail plea declined by Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda (order dated 22.02.2024); earlier petition CRM-M-39017-2024 dismissed as withdrawn (20.08.2024) – Counsel argued delay of two days in lodging FIR, ocular version not medically corroborated (five injuries versus 13-15 accused alleged), petitioner had shifted deceased to hospital, trial making no headway – Held: considering the gravity of the offence and all attending circumstances, petitioner does not qualify for bail at this stage – Petition dismissed – Nothing therein an expression of opinion on merits.

CRM-M-63 7 3-2025

1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

204 CRM-M-6373-2025 Decided on:02.08.2025

Gurwinder Singh ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...Respondent

Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Present: Mr. JPS Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner (through VC).

Mr. R.K. Singh, AAG, Punjab. ****

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

Praye r in the present second petitio n , filed under Section 483 of t he BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 1 15 dated 20.07. 2 023, registered under Sections 302, 323, 148 and 149 of the I P C, 1860 (Secti o n 325 of the IPC, 1860 added later on), at Police Station Sa d ar, Bathinda, District Bathinda.

Succi n ctly, the facts of the case are t h at the FIR in the present case w as lodged on t h e statement of complainant Jag s ir Singh, in which he alleged t h at he had two children. The elder son Jashand e ep Singh was aged about 20 ye a rs, whereas the younger to him is his dau g hter Gagandeep Kaur, who w as unmarried. On 18.07.2023, at about 05. 0 0 pm, he received a telepho n ic information t hat his son Jashandeep Singh h ad been injured during a fight a nd had been t a ken to the Civil Hospital, Bathinda. On receiving the s a id information, he rushed to the Civil Ho s pital, Bathinda, where his s on Jashandeep Singh told him that Ranjit S ingh, Gurwinder Singh @ G uri (petitioner h e rein) and Amanjeet Singh ali a s Amana, along with 10-12 ot h er unknown pe r sons, caused him injuries with baseball bats and daang . His s on VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.13 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-63 7 3-2025

2 -

was thereaft e r referred to Badiyal Hospital, Bathinda where he succumbed to the injuries. Hence, the request was made t o take legal action against all t he culprits. On registration of the FIR, the i nvestigation commenced and t he petitioner w as stated to be arrested on 2 3.07.2023 and the investigat i ng agencies col l ected various evidences and o n completion of the investigati o n, the challan w as presented. The learned tria l Court, on framing of the char g es, commenced with the trial. The petitioner a pproached the learned Additio n al Sessions Ju d ge, Bathinda praying for gran t of bail. However, after hear i ng both the si d es, the learned trial Court de c lined the same vide order da t ed 22.02.2024. Hence, aggrieved by the said o r der, the petitioner approached t h is Court for gr a nt of regular bail by way of fili n g CRM-M-39017-2024, howe v er, the same w a s dismissed as withdrawn b y this Court vide its order da t ed 20.08.2024 o n the request of counsel for th e petitioner. Now, the petitione r is again before this Court for grant of regula r bail by way of filing the pres e nt petition.

Learn e d counsel for the petitioner ha s contended that the petitioner h as been falsel y implicated in the present F I R case. He submitted that t he occurrence, as alleged, in the present cas e had taken place on 18.07.20 2 3, whereas the F IR had been lodged after a del a y of two days, i.e. on 20.07.20 2 3. It is submitt e d that the complainant had alle g ed that the deceased was assaul t ed by 13-15 ac c used persons, whereas there a r e only five injuries found on t he person of t he deceased and, thus, the o cular version is not medic a lly corroborated. He further submitted that it i s the petitioner who had shifted t he deceased to t he hospital and from the admis s ion/medical record, the said fac t is evident. H e further submitted that the p e titioner is behind the bars si n ce 23.07.2023 a nd since the trial is not ma k ing any headway, therefore, t he petitioner de s erves to be released on regular b ail.

VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.13 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-63 7 3-2025

3 -

Per c ontra, learned State counse l has vehemently opposed t he submissions made by the learned counsel f o r the petitioner and submitted t h at the petitione r has been specifically named in the FIR who, along with other c o- accused, ha d caused the murder of the d e ceased Jashandeep Singh. It is submitted th a t the petitioner had duly partici p ated in the commission of offe n ce and as the tr i al is progressing on a fast pace, thus, the present petition deser v es dismissal.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing t he available record, it is deciphered that the pet i tioner has been specifically na m ed in the FIR al o ng with other co-accused who h ad caused multiple injuries on t he persons of t h e deceased. The FIR had been lodged by the complainant, wh o is none else b u t the father of the deceased, o n the statement of the decea s ed himself wh o was in injured condition a t that time, who had therea f ter succumbed t o the injuries caused by the peti t ioner and his co-accused.

Keeping in view the gravity o f the offence and all the attend i ng circumstanc e s, this Court is of the consider e d opinion that the petitioner d o es not qualify f or the grant of bail at this sta g e and hence, the present petiti o n, being denud e d of any merit, is hereby dismi s sed. 7. Nothing said herein shall be co n strued as an expression of opin i on on the merit s of the case.

August 02, 2025 (Rajesh Bhardwaj) vinod Judge*

Whether Speaking/Reaso n ed: NO/YES Whether Reportable: NO/YES

VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.13 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document