Shaddeen v. State of Punjab

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)o

¶1Present petition is the third attempt, which has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.04 dated

04.01.2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of BNS and Section 238 of BNS 2023 (added later on), registered at Police Station Goindwal Sahib, District Tarn Taran.o

¶2The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:-o "Statement of Masoom Ali, son of Nawab Din, son of Chirag Din, resident of Bhinder Kala, police station Khalchia, district Amritsar, age 37 years, mobile number 98784-59225, stated that I am a resident of the above address and work as a laborer. We are 06 brothers and 03 sisters and all of us are simple people and along with our family we live in different places by making camps and earn our living by keeping buffaloes and selling buffalo milk. Our eldest brother NAVEEN NAGPAL

CRM-M-27471-2026 (O & M) -2-o

Sadiq, who was about 42 years old, along with his family, lives in a camp near village Miani, police station Goindwal Sahib and along with them other people also live there. All of them earn their living by selling buffalo milk. On the middle of the night of 03.01.2025, Sadiq and his wife started arguing and quarreling over something. As the quarrel escalated, Sadiq's wife Meena called her brother other Ammi and Shahdeen both sons of Kalu r/o Miyani and told them that my husband is quarreling with me and beating me. You reach the place. After a while, Ammi and Shahdeen came to the place. As soon as they arrived, they started beating him. My brother's daughter Neefa called me and told me that my father is being beaten up by my maternal uncles. At that time, I had come too o Goindwal Sahib for some personal work and after a while I reached the place and saw that Ammi s/o Kalu was holding a brick in his right hand. He was throwing my brother Sadiq on the ground and hitting him with the brick on his cheek. Shahdeen, who had a scar in his hand, was holding my brother's leg. He was beating him and Sadiq's wife was also holding him by the legs and seeing me coming, all the accused along with their weapons along with 4/5 other unknown persons all ran away from the spot. When I went to my brother, and saw that he has died. The night was very dark and cold and foggy, so I did not come to the police station to inform you."o

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that, assuming arguendo, the prosecution version is taken to be correct, the case would not invoke culpability under Section 103 of BNS (erstwhile Section 302 IPC) but only under Section 105 of the BNS (erstwhile Section 304 of IPC). Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than one year. Learned counsel has further submitted that the prime prosecution witnesses are not coming forward to have their testimonies recorded despite bailable warrants having been issued against them, which is clear from the perusal of orders dated

19.09.2025, 26.09.2025, and 16.10.2025 passed by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is a man with clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.o

¶4Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by

CRM-M-27471-2026 (O & M) -3-o

arguing that the allegations raised are direct and serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated

19.05.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.o

¶5I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. o

¶6The petitioner was arrested on 13.05.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out and challan stands presented on 08.11.2025 Total 21 prosecution witnesses have been cited but only one partly has been examined till date. The trial is procrastinating and folly thereof cannot be attributed upon the petitioner. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.2787 of 2024 titled as Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another, decided on 03.07.2024; relevant whereof reads as under:-o "19 If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime.o

¶20We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a convict. The over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly. howsoever stringent the penal law may be.o

¶21We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as well as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article 21 of the Constitution."o o

6.1 The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. Though learned counsel for the complainant has pleaded that the o CRM-M-27471-2026o(Oo&oM)ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-4-o o o o petitioners'osideoisoexertingopressure,obutonoomaterial,omucholessotangibleo evidence,ohasobeenobroughtoforthoinothisoregard.ooThisoCourtodoesonotodeemo itoappropriateotoodelveodeepointootheseorivalocontentions,oatothisostage,olesto itomayoprejudiceotheotrial.oNothingotangibleohasobeenobroughtoforwardotoo indicateotheolikelihoodoofotheopetitioneroabscondingofromotheoprocessoofo justiceoorointerferingowithotheoprosecutionoevidence.oo

6.2o Indubitably,otheopresentopetitionoisotheothirdoattemptoonobehalfoofo theopetitioneroforosecuringoregularobail.ooTheofirstooneobearingono.oCRM-M-56944-2025owasodismissedoasowithdrawnoono19.11.2025o(AnnexureoP-4)o whereasotheosecondooneobearingoCRM-M-18631-2026owasodismissedoaso withdrawnoono29.04.2026o(AnnexureoP-5).oooHowever,okeepingoinoviewotheo entiretyoofofactsoandocircumstanceoofotheocaseoinohandoespeciallyokeepingo inoviewotheoextendedocustodyoandopaceoofotrial,othisoCourtoisoinclinedotoo favourablyoconsiderotheoinstantopleaoforobail.oAoprofitableoreference,oinothiso regard,ocanobeomadeotooaojudgmentoofothisoCourtopassedoinoCRA-S-2332-2023otitledoasoRafiqoKhanoversusoStateoofoHaryanaoandoanother;orelevanto whereoforeadsoasounder:oo "10.o o Aso ano epilogueo too theo aboveo discussion,o theo followingoprinciplesoemerge:oo IoSecond/successiveoregularobailopetition(s)ofiledoisomaintainableo inolawo&ohenceosuchopetitionooughtonototoobeorejectedosolelyoono theogroundoofomaintainabilityothereof.o o II.oo Suchosecond/successiveoregularobailopetition(s)oiso maintainableo whethero earliero petitiono waso dismissedo aso withdrawn/dismissedo aso noto pressed/dismissedo foro non-prosecutionooroearlieropetitionowasodismissedoonomerits.oo o IIIo oForotheosecond/successiveoregularobailopetition(s)o too succeed,o theo petitioner/applicanto shallo beo essentially/pertinentlyorequiredotooshowosubstantialochangeoino circumstancesoandoshowingoofoaomereosuperficialooroostensibleo changeowouldonotosuffice.oTheometaphoricoexpressionoofoseekingo second/successiveo bailo plea(s)o oughto noto beo abstractedo intoo o CRM-M-27471-2026o(Oo&oM)ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-5-o o o o literaloiterationsoofopetition(s)owithoutosubstantial,oeffectiveoando consequentialochangeoinocircumstances.oo o IVo oNoo exhaustiveo guidelineso cano possiblyo beo laido downo aso too whato wouldo constituteo substantialo changeo ino circumstanceso aso everyo caseo haso itso owno uniqueo facts/circumstance.oMakingosuchoanoattemptoisonothingobutoano utopianoendeavour.ooErgo,othisoissueoisobestoleftotootheojudicialo wisdomo ando discretiono ofo theo Courto dealingo witho sucho second/successiveoregularobailopetition(s).o Vo oIno caseo ao Courto chooseso too granto second/successiveo regularo bailo petition(s),o cogento ando lucido reasonsoareopertinentlyo requiredotoobeorecordedoforograntingo sucho pleao despiteo sucho ao pleao beingo second/successiveo petition(s).o Ino othero words,o theo causeo foro ao Courto havingo successfullyo countenanced/entertainedo sucho second/successiveo petition(s)ooughtotoobeoreadilyoandoclearlyodecipherableofromo theosaidoorderopassed."o o

6.3.o Further,o aso pero custodyo certificateo datedo 19.05.2026o filedo byo learnedoStateocounsel,otheopetitionerohasoalreadyosufferedoincarcerationoforo aoperiodoofo01oyear,o4odaysoandoisoshownotoobeoinvolvedoinootheroFIR/case.oo However,othisofactumocannotobeoaogroundosufficientobyoitself,otoodeclineo theoconcessionooforegularobailotootheopetitioneroinotheoFIRoinoquestionowheno aocaseoisomadeooutoforograntooforegularobailoquaotheoFIRoinoquestionobyo ratiocinatingouponotheofacts/circumstancesoofotheosaidoFIR.oRelianceoinothiso regardocanobeoplacedouponotheojudgmentoofotheoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtoino MaulanaoMohd.oAmiroRashadiov.oStateoofoU.P.oandoanother,o2012o(1)o RCRo(Criminal)o586;oaoDivisionoBenchojudgmentoofotheoHon'bleoCalcuttao HighoCourtoinocaseoofoSridharoDasov.oState,o1998o(2)oRCRo(Criminal)o477o &ojudgmentsoofothisoCourtoinoCRM-MoNo.38822-2022otitledoasoAkhilesho Singhov.oStateoofoHaryana,odecidedoono29.11.2021,oandoBalrajov.oStateoofo Haryana,o1998o(3)oRCRo(Criminal)o191.o o Sufficeotoosay,ofurtherodetentionoofotheopetitioneroasoanoundertrialo isonotowarrantedoinotheofactsoandocircumstancesoofotheocase.o

CRM-M-27471-2026 (O & M) -6-o

¶7In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- o

(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.o

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.o

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.o

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.o

(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.o

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.o

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.o

o

¶8In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.o

¶9However,otheocomplainantoside,oinocaseoanyothreatoisoperceived,o shallobeoatolibertyotooapplyoforoaosecurityobeforeotheoconcernedoSSP.ooIno case,oanyosuchopleaoisoraised,otheoconcernedoSSPoshallodealowithotheosaido pleaoinoaoratiocinatedomannerowithinoaoperiodoofooneoweekofromotheoreceipto ofosuchoplea.oo

¶10Ordered accordingly.o o CRM-M-27471-2026o(Oo&oM)ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-7-o o o o

11.o Nothingosaidohereinaboveoshallobeoconstruedoasoanoexpressionoofo opinionoonotheomeritsoofotheocase.o

12.o Pendingoapplication(s),oifoany,oshalloalsoostandodisposedoof.o o o o o (SUMEEToGOEL)o o o oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooJUDGEo

20.05.2026o Naveeno o o Whetherospeaking/reasoned:o o Yes/Noo Whetheroreportable:o o o Yes/Noo

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAo AT CHANDIGARH o 223 o CRM-M-27471-2026 (O & M)o Date of decision : 20.05.2026o Date of uploading : 20.05.2026 o Shahdeen ………….PETITIONER o Versus o State of Punjab …….RESPONDENT o CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL o o Present: Dr. Khushbir Kaur Waraich, Advocate for the petitioner. o Mr.oJaypreetoSingh,oDAG,oPunjab.oo o ---o