Rajinder Singh Alias Aashu Vs State of Punjab

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No.64 dated 28.03.2021, registered under Sections 323, 324, 307, 506, 148, 149, 120-B and 201 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City-2, Khanna, District Ludhiana.

¶16

As per the allegations, Nikhil Sharma, younger son of complainant Anil Kumar Sharma had earlier been threatened by accused Rajan Bawa, against whom an FIR had been registered. On 28.03.2021, at about 7.45 p.m., while Nikhil Sharma was sitting in the parking area of Guru Amar Dass Market, Khanna, suddenly Rajan Bawa, along with Monu, Sanju, Ramma, Sunny, Shehzad, Gora, Billa and about 3-4 unknown persons, arrived at the spot armed with iron rods, swords, sickles and wooden sticks. They assaulted Nikhil Sharma with the intention to kill him and inflicted injuries on his head,

¶17

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CRM-M-21755-2026 (O&M)

¶19

-2-

¶20

arms and legs. On the arrival of members of the public, the assailants fled from the spot leaving behind certain weapons. The injured was first taken to Civil Hospital, Khanna and thereafter referred to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala. On the basis of the said statement, the present FIR was registered.

¶21

During the course of investigation, the injured victim specifically named the petitioner, Rajinder Singh @ Ashu, in his statement dated 01.04.2021. It was disclosed by him that prior to the occurrence, the petitioner, along with a co-accused, had uploaded a video on social media while brandishing deadly weapons and had openly threatened to kill the injured. On the date of the incident, the petitioner had participated in the assault and along with other co-accused, inflicted repeated blows on the face, chest, neck and arms of the injured with the intention to kill him. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan was presented in the Court against the co-accused. The petitioner was arrested on 07.08.2025. Investigation qua him now stands completed.

¶22

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not named in the FIR and has subsequently been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion. The investigation was transferred to the Bureau of Investigation, Punjab, thereby indicating serious doubts regarding the fairness of the initial investigation. It is further argued that one of the co-accused has already secured quashing of the proceedings on the basis of compromise. Counsel submits that the petitioner has remained in custody since 07.08.2025. The trial is likely to consume considerable time. He is on bail in the other criminal cases. It is argued that the petitioner is neither a proclaimed offender nor a previous convict and there is

¶23

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-21755-2026 (O&M)

¶25

-3-

¶26

no likelihood of his absconding or influencing the prosecution witnesses if enlarged on bail. Co-accused Manoj, Sunny, Neelkamal Singh @ Bill and Gurdit Singh have already been granted concession of anticipatory/regular bail by this Court. On parity, the petitioner too deserves to be given the same benefit. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

¶27

Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has argued keeping in view the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner as well as his criminal antecedents, he is not entitled to get benefit of bail. It is, thus, urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

This Court has heard the rival submissions. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have actively participated in the assault opened upon the injured with intention to kill him. The record reveals that the petitioner was admittedly not named in the FIR. His alleged involvement surfaced during the course of investigation. The petitioner has remained in custody since 07.08.2025. Investigation stands concluded and the challan has already been presented. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner is required for any further custodial interrogation. Considering the number of accused and witnesses, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. He is shown to be on bail in other cases registered against him. Similarly situated several coaccused have already been granted concession of bail by this Court. The principles of parity also weighs in favour of the petitioner. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail to him. Accordingly, the

¶29

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶30

CRM-M-21755-2026 (O&M)

¶31

-4-

¶32

present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner is found involved in any other subsequent case.

¶33

It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case.

¶34

24.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE

¶35

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶36

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.24 12:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajinder Singh Alias Aashu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Singh Alias Aashu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarabjit Singh and Anr. Vs Happy Chhabra

Pala Singh and Another Vs State of Haryana and Another

Devraj Vs State of Punjab

M/S Thakur Dass Murari Lal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Ishant Vs State of Haryana

Vikram Kumar Vs State of Punjab