03.2026 Baldev Singh alias Harman Singh v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. S.P.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
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 Petitioner(s) Date FIR No. Section(s) Baldev Singh alias Harman Singh 90 18.09.2024 309(4), 191(3), 190, 61(2), 249, 238, 111(2), 111(3), 111(5) of BNS, 2023 & 25/27/54/59 of Arms Act, 1959 Police Station Kathu Nangal District Amritsar (Rural)
After arguing for some time and being faced with the fact that the witnesses who were present in the Bank at the time of the alleged commission of dacoity are yet to be examined, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action after examination of such material witnesses.
Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as sought and recorded JAWALA RAM 2026.03.06 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-61706-2025 - 2 - here-above. The learned trial Court is directed to record the statements of the material witnesses at the first instance, at the earliest. Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 05, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2026.03.06 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Arms Act, 1959.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 05 Mar 2026. The bench was SANJAY VASHISTH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.