Kirpal Singh @ Pal vs State Of Punjab

CRM-M-40886-2026 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
212
CRM-M-40886-2026
Decided on : 05.11.2026
KIRPAL SINGH @ PAL
......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Ashish Pundir, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurpartap Singh, AAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
nd
1. The instant 2 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
hereunder:-
Name of
Petitioner
(s)
FIR
No.
Date Section(s) Police
Station
District
Kirpala
Singh @
Pal, aged
162 13.12.2019 307, 224, 332, 353,
Moonak Sangrur
186, 130 of IPC
[corresponding to
sections 109, 262,
121(1), 132, 221, 159,
191(3), 190, 238, 317
and 61 of BNS] and
Section 25 of Arms
Act, 1959
about 40
years
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 2
st
2. 1 bail petition i.e. CRM-M-57513-2025 filed by the
petitioner, was dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide
order dated 11.02.2026 (Annexure P-9).
3. On 13.12.2019 at about 9:00 AM, when police team was
about to produce one accused Bhagwan Singh @ Gaggi before the Court
of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moonak, said accused was got
freed by the number of accused sitting in Brezza car. Thereupon FIR was
got registered on the statement of ASI Baldev Singh, which reads as
under:-
“Today, i.e., on 13.12.2019 at about 9.00 A.M., I
along with Constable-2 Jaspal Singh
No.2212/Bathinda, Constable Charanjit Singh
No.1283/Bathinda, had brought accused Bhagwan
Singh @ Gaggi son of Jasveer Singh, resident of
Ladaal, P.S. Lehra, District Sangrur from Central
Jail, Bathinda, who was already confined in Central
Jail, Bathinda, to produce him with handcuff in the
Court of Sh. Gurmehtab Singh, JMIC, Moonak in case
FIR No. 105, dated 24.07.2016, under Sections 341,
322, 120-B, 109, 34 IPC, P.S. Lehra in private vehicle
No. PB-11CB-5805 Make Ritz. After producing the
above mentioned accused and after the hearing of the
above mentioned accused in the court, i.e. at about
12.30 P.M., I along with my colleagues started from
Moonak to Bathinda after handcuffing the accused.
When we reached at outer gate of Moonak Court on
Patran-Moonak main road, then a vehicle bearing No.
PB05AG-6605, Make Brezza, white colour was
already parked over there in which 4-5 unknown
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 3
persons were sitting. Then accused Bhagwan Singh @
Gaggi said to us to stop the car as he wanted to vomit.
When we stopped the vehicle and permitted the above
mentioned accused to vomit then two out of the 4/5
persons who were sitting in the vehicle No. PB05AG-
6605 Make Brezza of white colour, under some
conspiracy, alighted from the vehicle and with an
intention to kill us, they started firing upon us and the
bullet hit in the right thigh of Constable Charanjit
Singh No. 1283/Bathinda. Due to which we became
nervous and the above said persons got escaped
accused Bhagwan Singh @ Gaggi from us and took
him into their vehicle along with handcuffing and ran
away towards Moonak Side. Then we chased the
vehicle and in retaliation Constable-2 Jaspal Singh
No. 2212/Bathinda fired three gunshots from his
official carbine on the tyres of said vehicle. But the
above said persons sped their vehicle from Moonak
Barrier towards Tohana side, but I along with police
party chased them. However accused succeeded in
running away by leaving their vehicle near Tohana
Hisar Road, near Tohana Canal. Thereafter, we took
our injured colleague Constable Charanjit Singh No.
1283/Bathinda in injured condition in Govt. Hospital,
Moonak after coming back from Tohana and got him
admitted there. From where, the Doctor Sahib
referred Constable Charanjit Singh No.
1283/Bathinda to higher hospital after giving him first
aid. Then, I arranged ambulance and sent injured
Constable Charanjit Singh under the supervision of
Constable-2 Jaspal Singh to Bathinda Hospital for
admission. I was coming to Police Station and you
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 4
along with police party met me at T point Ballran
Road, Moonak. The above mentioned accused persons
have interfered in our official duty by taking away
above accused from our custody. I can identify the
above said unknown persons if brought before me.
Legal action may be taken against above mentioned
4-5 unknown persons who were sitting in Vehicle No.
PB-05AG-6605 Make Brezza, white colour as well as
accused Bhagwan Singh @ Gaggi. I have got my
statement recorded to you, heard and is correct.
Sd/- ASI Baldev Singh, 734/Bathinda
Verified S.I. Gurmeet Singh (SHO Moonak) dated
13.12.2019.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that name of
petitioner is not there in the FIR, however, he was nominated as accused
on the disclosure statements of co-accused Sandeep Singh alias
Simrandeep Singh alias Soni Singh, who has already been released on
bail vide order dated 06.10.2020 passed in CRM-M-30192-2020
(Annexure P-3).
5. Further argues that other co-accused have already been
granted the concession of bail, details of whom are mentioned here
under:-
Sr.
No.
Name of co-accused Date of order
Petition No.
granting bail
1. Bhagwan Singh alias
23.07.2025 CRM-M-4668-2025
Gaggi
2. Lakhwinder Singh 06.10.2020 CRM-M-12886-2020
3. Sandeep Singh alias
06.10.2020 CRM-M-30192-2020
Simrandeep Singh
alias Soni Singh
4. Lakhwinder Singh 10.02.2023 CRM-M-52264-2022
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 5
alias Lakha
5. Chamkaur Singh alias
19.05.2025 CRM-M-10995-2025
Ricky
6. Harsimran Singh alias
08.09.2021 CRM-M-38806-2020
Simma
Jabarjang Singh @ Jabra 05.08.2026 CRM-M-29766-2026
7.
6. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is
inside jail since 19.12.2019, and has undergone for a period of five years
eight months and thirty days inside jail. Out of total 38 prosecution
witnesses, only two have been examined till date after re-framing of
charges on 27.02.2026. There being no progress in the trial, the
concessional relief of bail be considered qua him.
7. In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel
for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate
dated 03.11.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag
the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the
counsel for the petitioner.
As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner
has already undergone 05 years 08 months and 30 days period inside jail.
8. Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer for grant
of regular bail and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the
petitioner, submits that petitioner is a habitual offender and, apart from
the present case, is involved in total 40 other criminal cases.
9. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
out of the aforesaid 40 cases, petitioner has already been acquitted in 21
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 6
cases, convicted in five cases, and six cases are presently pending trial, in
five of which he has already been granted bail, and in some cases,
sentence has already been undergone by the petitioner, and in some other
cases, he has been discharged.
10. Learned State counsel, however, submits that, keeping in
view the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and his alleged
involvement in numerous criminal cases, he does not deserve the
concession of regular bail. Accordingly, dismissal of the present petition
is prayed for.
11. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties and has also perused the record available before it.
12. Considering the overall circumstances of the case,
particularly the fact that other co-accused, including Bhagwan Singh @
Gaggi and Harsimran Singh @ Simma, have already been granted the
concession of bail, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner
cannot be denied the same relief, merely on the ground of his
involvement in several other criminal cases, particularly when the
petitioner has already undergone substantial incarceration.
13. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that, out of total 38
prosecution witnesses, only two have been examined so far, whereas
petitioner has remained behind bars for more than five years and eight
months. Though the petitioner is stated to be involved in several other
criminal cases, the fact remains that he has already undergone a
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 7
substantial period of incarceration in the present case as well, and
conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time.
14. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view
that the continued incarceration of the petitioner, particularly in the face
of the slow progress of the trial, is not warranted and he deserves to be
extended the concession of regular bail.
15. In view of the totality of the circumstances, nature of the
allegations levelled against the petitioner, period of incarceration already
undergone by him, progress of the trial and the other factors noticed here
above, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular
bail to the petitioner in the present case.
Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is
allowed . Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his
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.
16. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any
threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner
directly or indirectly.
17. However, it is clarified that in case, petitioner is absent from
the proceedings of the Court, definitely he won’t be entitled to any
concessional relief till the final decision of the trial.
18. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall
not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case.
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-40886-2026 8
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.
19. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly
found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to
be cancelled.
20. Petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
05.11.2026
Lavisha
Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
JAWALA RAM
2026.11.05 20:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document