Allowed

Sukhdev Singh Alias Laddu v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Feb 2026CRM-M/43448/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regular bail in a case of snatching of gold ear-rings from the complainant, who died falling from his scooter; charges framed but only 4 of 15 PWs examined after over three years' custody and no other criminal involvement.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate with standard conditions.

Sukhdev Singh Alias Laddu Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

Prayer in the present petition f iled under Section 483 BNSS is for gra n t of regular bail to the petitio n er in case FIR No.170 dated 29.09.2022 , registered under Sections 37 9 -B(2) IPC, Sections 304 and 201 IPC ( a dded later on), at Police Stat i on Majitha, District Amritsar Rural.

¶2

2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody fo r 3 years and more than 4 m onths. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is alle g ed to have snatched ear-rings. Charges ha v e been framed on 18.07.2023, 4 PWs, including the material witnesses, s tand examined, but there are s till 11 more to go. He is not involved in any other case.

¶3

The custody certificate dated 0 2.02.2026, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per th e same, the petitioner is behind bars for 3 years, 4 months and 2 days.

¶4

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.03 18:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶5

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having snatched gold items from Ranjit Singh, who thereupon had died after falling from the scooter. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner being not involved in any other case.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

¶8

harges stand framed on

¶9

18.07.2023, however, 4 PWs, including the complainant, have been examined, out of 15;

¶10

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶13

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

¶14

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.03 18:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶15

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

¶16

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

¶17

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

¶18

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

¶19

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

¶20

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

¶21

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of

¶22

the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

¶23

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.

¶24

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.02.03 18:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Sukhdev Singh Alias Laddu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhdev Singh Alias Laddu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Davinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Lovepreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Narender Vs State of Haryana and Others

Shambhu Parsad Gaur Vs State of Punjab and Another

Dharam Singh Vs State of Haryana