High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 P&H CK 1985

Gurdeep Singh @ Gaggi Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 14 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M-31354-2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 455 words

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS (Section 439 Cr.P.C.) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0151 dated 12.11.2025 under Sections 126(2), 109, 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(3) of BNS, 2023 (Sections 117(2), 1118(2), 238 BNS added later on) [Sections 341, 307, 323, 324, 149, 148 IPC and Sections 325, 326, 201 IPC added later on] registered at Police Station Chhajli, District Sangrur.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the injury attributed to the petitioner is a simple injury on the person of the complainant-Jagsir Singh. The injury attracting Section 307 IPC (Section 109 BNS) is attributed to Arshdeep Singh @ Sheena (since granted the concession of bail vide order dated 19.05.2026 passed by this Court, Annexure P-3). As the petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2026 but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail, moreso, when three co-accused, namely, Arshdeep Singh @ Sheena, Gurpiar Singh @ Gurpyar Singh @ Ramandeep Singh @ Raman and Jaskaran Singh @ Karandeep Singh @ Karna have been granted the concession of bail by this Court vide separate orders i.e. Annexures P-3 to P-5 respectively.

3.

The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, does not dispute the factual assertion that three co-accused have been granted the concession of bail, that petitioner has been attributed simple injury, that he is in custody since 04.02.2026 and that none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5.

The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2026 but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial in the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required, moreso, when three co-accused i.e. Arshdeep Singh @ Sheena, Gurpiar Singh @ Gurpyar Singh @ Ramandeep Singh @ Raman and Jaskaran Singh @ Karandeep Singh @ Karna have been granted the similar concession of bail.

6.

Thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Gurdeep Singh @ Gaggi Singh is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

7.

This petition stands disposed of.

8.

The pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.