✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 03 Jul 2026

State of Punjab v. Mr. Manjinder S. Bhullar, DAG, Punjab

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

Petition stands disposed of

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 1212. Petition stands disposed of. Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE July 03, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

Judgment

Judgment

#1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising

out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Parkash Kaur 194 19.09.2023 S. 323/148/149 of IPC [corresponding S. 115(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS, 2023] (offence u/s 302, 307, 324, 34 of IPC added later on) [corresponding S. 191(3), 190 of BNS, 2023] Police Station Sadar Fazilka District Fazilka

#2. Incident took place on 16.09.2023, and FIR was got registered at the instance of Rajinder Singh (son of deceased, namely Jeet Singh), and same reads as under:- “Statement of Rajinder Singh son of Jeet Singh son of Kesar Singh r/o Mohomad Amira, Police station Sadar Fazika, aged about 23 years Mb. no. 88476-46622. Stated that I am resident of aforesaid address and works as an agriculturist. We are four brothers and sisters. Balwinder Singh is CRM-M-32458-2026 (O&M) - 2 - elder to me and Krishan Singh is elder to him and eldest amongst all is sister Veena Rani on 16.09.2023 at about 04.00pm that I brought cotton bundle stick and kept it infront of my house in the street at the backside Al of my uncle Pritam Singh's house, then my paternal uncle Pritam Az Singh armed with dang, paternal aunt Parkash Rani armed with iron rod came there and started abusing me and said that why you have kept the bundle adjoining to our wall and both hold me A3 and took me to their house. My paternal uncle's son Sourav, who was armed with dang and was present in the house and these three started giving me beatings. My paternal aunt Parkash Rani gave iron rod blow on my head, which hit on my forehead, due to which I fell down and then Gaurav gave a dang blow, which hit on my finger of my left hand and my parental uncle Pritam Singh gave dang blow on me, which hit on my left shoulder and these three also pushed me due to which there is an abrasion on finger of my right hand and thumb of right hand, then my paternal uncle and aunt pushed me and turned me out of the house and at that time Gaurav made video in the mobile phone and these three close the gate after after turning turning me me out out of their house. I raised alarm mardita, then my brother Balwinder Singh and father Jeet Singh came on the spot. My father Jeet Singh called my paternal uncle Pritam Singh and asked him that why they have caused injuries to my son, then in the meantime my paternal uncle Pritam Singh armed with dang, paternal aunt Parkash Rani armed with iron rod and my paternal uncle son Gaurav armed with dang came outside after opening the gate of their house and started shouting and on hearing the shouts Mangat Singh son of Balvir Singh armed with dang, Dalip Singh son of Arjan Singh empty handed and Rajinder Singh son of Gurdip Singh empty handed all residents of village Mohomad Hamira, Dalip Singh and Rajinder Singh aforesaid on raising alarm said to caught hold of Jeet Singh etc. and they should not be spared, in the meantime, my paternal aunt Parkash Rani gave two blow of iron rod upon my father Jeet Singh, on his head, which hit on his head and my father fell down on the ground and he raised his hand in order to save himself, then Mangat Singh and Pritam Singh gave dang blow to my father, which hit on the fingers of the hand and on the arms. My brother Balwinder Singh came forward to save my father then Mangat Singh gave two dang blows upon him, which hit on the backside of his head, we all raise alarm of mardita- mardita, then Kishan Singh came on the spot and other villagers also gathered on the spot, then all these ran away from the spot with their weapons and during the fight Pritam Singh and Parkash Rani also received minor injuries, then my CRM-M-32458-2026 (O&M) - 3 - brother Krishan Singh on arranging the vehicle got us admitted at civil Hosptial, Fazilka for treatment, due to receipt of serious injuries my father Jeet Singh was referred to treatment to GGSMC Faridkot and my brother Krishan Singh on arranging the vehicle got my father Jeet Singh admitted at GGSMC Faridkot and doctor referred my father at PGI Chandigarh for treatment. My brother Krishan Singh got my father Jeet Singh admitted at Bathinda Neurospine and Tressa Centre Bathinda, where my father is undergoing treatment. Due to receipt of serious injuries operation of my father head was conducted. Pritam Singh, Parkash Rani and Gaurav and Mangat Singh, Dalip Singh and Rajinder Singh aforesaid in connivance with each other has inflicted injuries to my father Jeet Singh with intention to kill him and to me and my brother Balwinder Singh. Legal action should be taken against aforesaid. Statement has been recorded, heard, it is correct and on finding the same to be correct.”

#3. Initially, investigation was processed qua total six accused, however, three of them were exonerated and remaining three accused, namely (I) Pritam Singh, (ii) Prakash Rani (petitioner herein) (written as ‘Parkash Kaur’ in the memo of parties of the present petition), and (iii) Mangat Singh, were challaned. Specific role assigned to the petitioner is of giving iron rod blows to the complainant, who suffered injuries and also to the deceased – Jeet Singh, on his vital part, i.e., head. Additionally, it is also pointed out that petitioner's husband, namely, Pritam Singh, had also suffered injuries and a cross-version vide DDR No.22 dated 22.10.2023 was also registered. However, according to petitioner, due to unfair investigation, no action was taken against complainant qua the same incident.

#4. Without examining much the factual controversy, learned counsel for petitioner seeks bail on the ground that petitioner is a woman and is inside jail for the last more than a period of 02 years and 09 months. It is further submitted that all material witnesses, including injured/complainant, CRM-M-32458-2026 (O&M) - 4 - have already been examined and, with aid of Section 480 of BNSS, 2023, concessional relief has been sought.

#5. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is the main accused and only on the ground that she is a woman having been inflicted injuries to the injured/complainant and deceased both on the vital parts of their body, is not entitled for grant of bail in any manner.

#6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and gone through record.

#7. Undoubtedly, petitioner is facing serious allegations. However, this Court has time and again noticed provisions of Section 480 of BNSS, 2023, which specifically incorporate a legislative intent not to keep in custody, for an indefinite and long period, a person who is a child, woman, sick or infirm. For ready reference, Section 480 reads as under:-

#480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence. (1) When any person accused of, or suspected of, the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but- (i) such person shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life;(ii) such person shall not be so released if such offence is a cognizable offence and he had been previously convicted of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more, or he had been previously convicted on two or more occasions of a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for three years or more but less than seven years : Provided that the Court may direct that a person referred to in clause (i) or clause (ii) be released on bail if such person is a child or is a woman or is sick or infirm : Provided further that the Court may also direct that a CRM-M-32458-2026 (O&M) - 5 - person referred to in clause (ii) be released on bail if it is satisfied that it is just and proper so to do for any other special reason: (2) xxxxxxxxx (3) xxxxxxxxx (4) xxxxxxxxx (5) xxxxxxxxx (6) xxxxxxxxx (7) xxxxxxxxx

#8. It is also noticeable that petitioner has remained inside jail for a considerable period of about 02 years and 09 months. She is not involved in any other case except present one. It is also a matter of record that prior to the occurrence, no other complaint from either side was ever lodged against each other. Whether it is a cold-blooded murder or any substance exists in cross-version also would be an issue, if raised before trial Court at an appropriate stage of trial. Further, injured/complainant – Rajinder Singh and another eye- witness, namely, Balwinder Singh, have already been examined. Thus, possibility of petitioner influencing these material witnesses appears to be minimal.

#9. In totality of circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that petitioner, being a woman, has already undergone the incarceration period for about 02 years and 09 months and she is not alleged to be involved in any other criminal case and material prosecution witnesses have already been examined. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, continued detention of petitioner for an indefinite period would not serve any useful purpose. CRM-M-32458-2026 (O&M) - 6 - Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.

#10. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

#11. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

#12. Petition stands disposed of. Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE July 03, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition stands disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 480, 483; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 115(2), 190, 191(3).

Which court decided this case, and when?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 03 Jul 2026. The bench was SANJAY VASHISTH.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CRM-M No. 32458 of 2026). ← Search more judgments