Imandeep Singh Alias Imna vs State of Punjab

H.S Grewal, J

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in case FIR No. 25 dated 02.05.2023 under Sections 302,307,452,323,324,148,149,506,427,120-B IPC and Sections 25,54,59 of Arms Act registered at Police Station, Sherpur, District Sangrur.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with 13 other co-accused have entered into the house of complainant, damaged the house and gave beatings and caused injuries to Amandeep Singh, Nirmal Singh and Gobind Singh causing injuries which led to their death.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and no specific role has been attributed to him except for the fact that he was sitting in the vehicle in which the other co-accused allegedly arrived at the spot. He further submits that the petitioner has not participated in the occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 09.05.2023.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has played an active role in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel has filed the status report along with the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today and the same are taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 10.09.2025, the petitioner is in custody for last 02 years 03 months and 29 days. He further submits that out of 29 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far.

Mr. Manu Sachdeva, Advocate appears and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He has vehemently opposes the prayer for the concession of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that the material witnesses have not been examined so far and prays for the dismissal of the bail.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Keeping in view the role of the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for last 02 years 03 months and 29 days. Moreover, rule is bail, jail is exception. Since the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the applicant is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.