Allowed¶29

Satnam Singh v. State of Punjab

Bail – Regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Mar 2026CRM-M/4779/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail; Section 483 BNSS 2023; CRM-M-4779-2025 (O&M); High Court of Punjab & Haryana; FIR No.18 dated 02.02.2024 PS Bhindi Saidan Amritsar; Sections 307/336/506/148/149 IPC, Section 302 added later; Sections 25 & 27 Arms Act 1959; firing in air from licensed weapon; no injury attributed to petitioner; brother of main accused Jaskaran Singh; custody since 03.02.2024; charge framed 02.09.2024; 2 of 24 witnesses examined; clean antecedents; no influencing prosecution witnesses; Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.; decided 12.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail on furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned, subject to the condition of not threatening or influencing prosecution witnesses. ¶29

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Satnam Singh is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.18 dated 02.02.2024, Police Station Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar.

¶10

Court's answer

Considering the period of custody already undergone, the petitioner's clean antecedents, the nature of allegations and the stage of trial, the Court found it appropriate to allow the petition.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶29

Key takeaways

Petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.ratio¶30
Observations in the order shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case; the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - Regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 - FIR No.18 dated 02.02.2024, PS Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar, under Sections 307, 336, 506, 148, 149 IPC (Section 302 added later) and Sections 25 & 27 Arms Act, 1959 - incident arising out of a lease/land dispute; as per the FIR a shot hit Gurmukh Singh on the forehead (Section 302 added later; counsel stated the incident pertains to his death) - petitioner Satnam Singh, contended by counsel (not disputed by the State) to have been nominated solely as brother of main accused Jaskaran Singh, was specifically attributed only firing of shot(s) in the air from his licensed weapon, with no injury attributed to him - in custody since 03.02.2024, investigation complete, chargesheet filed, charge framed 02.09.2024, 2 of 24 witnesses examined, no other criminal antecedents - bail allowed having regard to custody period, clean antecedents, nature of allegations and stage of trial, subject to condition that petitioner shall not threaten or influence prosecution witnesses; observations expressly not an expression on merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

115

¶3

CRM-M-4779-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 12.03.2026 Satnam Singh ...Petitioner

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

State of Punjab ...Respondent

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for t h e petitioner.

¶7

Mr . Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punja b

¶8

¶9

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶10

Th e instant first petition has been fi led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Naga r ik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in c a se bearing FIR No.18 dated 02.02.2024 registered under Sections 307, 3 3 6, 506, 148, 149 (Section 302 a dded later on) of the Indian Penal Code, 1 8 60 and Sections 25 & 27 of t h e Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar.

¶11

Th e FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Balwinder Sing h , son of Darshan Singh, the same reads thus:

¶12

“St a ted that I am permanent reside n t of above noted address and in a ddition to the agricultural wo r k and perform the duties as Gr a nthi Singh in Gurudwara Sahib o f Village Chann. My resident is outskirts of Village Awaan Wasao in fields. I have four children. Th e eldest daughter is Jaspreet K a ur aged about 22 years and younger is Gurpreet Singh aged ab o ut 21 years, youngest to him is G urmukh Singh aged about 19 y e ars and youngest is Jaskaran Ka u r aged about 16 years. My all t h e children are unmarried and als o lived in same house. About 1 5 /16 years ago, our two acre lan d which is owned by Punjab G overnment and we used to cul t ivate the same. That Satnam Sin g h son of Daya singh, resident of V illage Awan Wasao took the sai d land on lease orally from my

¶13

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.12 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

¶15

115 CRM-M-4779-2025(O&M)

¶16

mother Pritam Kaur and Satnam singh started cultivating the same. About 8/9 years ago my mother was expired. After the death of my mother, I told Satnam singh that I will return the amount which you gave to my mother Pritam Kaur for taking the land on lease and you should vacate the land, but they did not listen anything and said that regarding what land you are talking about as we have transferred the said land in our name. Lateron I came to know that Satnam singh had transferred the said two acre land situated in Khasra no.31/9 and 31/12 in his name by preparing fake documents. Whenever Satnam Singh party came to this land and threatened us that if you put foot in this land, we will kill you. Today I alongwith my wife Shinder Kaur and elder son namely Gurpreet Singh went to my relation in Village Bhindi Saidan. The time will be 5:00 PM, my son Gurmukh Singh called me and said that Satnam Singh son of Daya Singh resident of Village Awan Wasao and other men are abusing us lot outside our house. On which I alongwith my wife and son came back to our house at about 6.00 PM. When I came home, then saw that Jaskaran Singh son of Daya Singh armed with revolver, Satnam Singh son of Daya Singh armed with 12 bore rifle, Jagroop Singh son of Satnam Singh armed with datar, Ranjit Singh @ Rana son of Jaskaran Singh armed with Gandasa residents of Village Awan Wasao, Harpreet Singh son of Baldev Singh resident of Village Jasrau armed with baseball, who were standing in Tara Singh's land, near our house and abusing us. The land of Tara Singh is adjoining to our house and is much lower than our house. I went towards them through courtyard of my house and said that why you are abusing us and then they started arguing with me and said that if you put foot in two acre land then they will kill entire family. At that time my son Gurmukh singh also came to me. Then Ranjit singh @ Rana raised lalkara and said that caught them and don't escape today and let them taste for demanding land. Then Satnam Singh twice fired in air from his revolver. Then Jaskaran Singh fired from his revolver towards my son Gurmukh Singh, which hit on his forehead. My son fell down on the ground

¶17

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.12 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

¶19

115 CRM-M-4779-2025(O&M)

¶20

covered with blood. We raised noise "Marditta-Marditta" then above said assailants fled away from the spot alongwith their respective weapons. After arranging the vehicle, I took my son' Gurmukh Singh to Government Hospital, Ajnala for treatment, where doctor gave him first aid and referred my son Gurmukh Singh to Shri Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar, but on seeing the serious condition of my son, I got him admitted in C-Zone Hospital, Ajnala, where my son is under treatment. That above persons have committed excess with us. The entire incident has been witnessed by me, my son Gurpreet Singh and my wife Shinder Kaur.”

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the incident in question pertains to the death of Gurmukh Singh, a boy aged nearly 17-18 years, as a result of the gunfire shot attributed to Jaskaran Singh i.e. the main accused. He further contends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused solely because he is brother of Jaskaran Singh. He further contends that the specific attribution against the petitioner is only to the extent that he had a licenced weapon and that he had fired a shot in the air. The said shot never hit anybody and was not even intended to injure any person and only to scare and protect their property. He further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 03.02.2024. The investigation in the case is complete and the chargesheet has been filed. The charge has also been framed on 02.09.2024 and out of 24 witnesses only 02 have been examined so far. He further contends that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents.

¶22

Learned State Counsel does not dispute the facts as aforesaid and does not controvert that the petitioner is not attributed any injury to any person. He further does not dispute that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is

¶23

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.12 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

¶25

115 CRM-M-4779-2025(O&M)

¶26

that he fired a gunfire shot in air from his licenced weapon and the same was neither aimed at any assailant nor fired towards them.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition.

¶28

Taking into consideration the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, his clean antecedents, the nature of allegations levelled against him as well as the stage of trial, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition.

¶29

The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶30

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.

¶31

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

¶32

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶33

12.03.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶34

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.12 19:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Satnam Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satnam Singh 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

Baljinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Nishan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manisha Vs State of Punjab

Indira Bhandari and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Chamkaur Singh Vs State of Punjab

Amandeep Singh Alias Ambu Vs State of Punjab