CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) 1- 222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 RAJVINDER SINGH @ RAJA BOXER …PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Simranjeet Singh Sarwara, Advocate, Ms. Ripandeep Kaur, Advocate Ms. Meghna Saini, Advocate and Mr. Vikram, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG Punjab. **** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 94 dated 02.07.2025 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 191(3), 190 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Anaj Mandi, Patiala. Offence under Sections 117(2), 118(2), 324(4) BNS were added in the FIR during investigation. This is the second petition for regular bail. First petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.02.2026. 2. Case was registered on statement of Paramjit Singh who stated that on 01.07.2025, he along with his brother Sikander Singh and his friend Honey were going to Patiala Court for appearance and when they reached near Peer Di Dargah, Upkar Nagar, Patiala, one unknown black coloured car hit them from behind, as a result of which, they fell from their motorcycle. Raja Boxer, Harinder Singh, Sahil Negi, Harry, Vikas @ Aanda, SUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) -2-

Yash @ Bhola and 5-6 unknown persons surrounded them. Unknown persons, who came on a motorcyle, grabbed him from his arm and thereafter, Raja Boxer, Harinder Singh, Sahil Negi, Harry, Vikas @ Aanda and Yash @ Bhola gave kirpan blows on his head, nose, left arm, middle three fingers of right hand, right arm, right leg and right knee, as a result of which, he suffered a number of injuries. The unknown persons also caused injuries to him with fists blows. He cried for help, on which public started gathering and the assailants ran away from the spot. Thereafter, he was taken to the hospital for treatment. Accused were arrested and after completion of investigation, final report has been presented against the accused for trial. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case. Co-accused namely Gurwinder Singh @ Inder and Sahil Negi had since been allowed regular bail by this Court vide order dated 06.11.2025 and 06.07.2026 respectively. Petitioner was in custody for the last 10 months and 26 days. The case was at initial stage and charges were yet to be framed. Petitioner, though involved in 06 other cases, deserved to be enlarged on regular bail, considering the period of incarceration undergone.

4. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate dated 21.07.2026, which is taken on record. He opposes the prayer for regular bail on the ground that allegations against the petitioner were serious in nature and he was involved in 6 other cases. Considering his antecedents, he did not deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. 5. Petitioner is in custody in this case w.e.f. 25.08.2025 i.e. for the last 10 months and 26 days. Investigation of the case is complete and challan had been presented. Though, petitioner is involved in 6 other cases, he is notSUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) -3-

a previous convict. In view of the ratio of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tiwari Vs. State of UP and Anr. 2020(1) RCR (Criminal) 831 and Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and Others 2012(2) SCC 382, involvement of accused in other criminal cases cannot be the sole ground to deny him the concession of bail. Truth of the allegations against the petitioner can be determined only on conclusion of trial, which is likely to take some time to conclude. Considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, the stage of trial which is yet to commence, the petition is allowed. Without a comment on merits of the case, petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 23.07.2026 Sumit Singla Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) 1- 222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 RAJVINDER SINGH @ RAJA BOXER …PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Simranjeet Singh Sarwara, Advocate, Ms. Ripandeep Kaur, Advocate Ms. Meghna Saini, Advocate and Mr. Vikram, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG Punjab. **** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 94 dated 02.07.2025 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 191(3), 190 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Anaj Mandi, Patiala. Offence under Sections 117(2), 118(2), 324(4) BNS were added in the FIR during investigation. This is the second petition for regular bail. First petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.02.2026. 2. Case was registered on statement of Paramjit Singh who stated that on 01.07.2025, he along with his brother Sikander Singh and his friend Honey were going to Patiala Court for appearance and when they reached near Peer Di Dargah, Upkar Nagar, Patiala, one unknown black coloured car hit them from behind, as a result of which, they fell from their motorcycle. Raja Boxer, Harinder Singh, Sahil Negi, Harry, Vikas @ Aanda, SUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) -2-

Yash @ Bhola and 5-6 unknown persons surrounded them. Unknown persons, who came on a motorcyle, grabbed him from his arm and thereafter, Raja Boxer, Harinder Singh, Sahil Negi, Harry, Vikas @ Aanda and Yash @ Bhola gave kirpan blows on his head, nose, left arm, middle three fingers of right hand, right arm, right leg and right knee, as a result of which, he suffered a number of injuries. The unknown persons also caused injuries to him with fists blows. He cried for help, on which public started gathering and the assailants ran away from the spot. Thereafter, he was taken to the hospital for treatment. Accused were arrested and after completion of investigation, final report has been presented against the accused for trial. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case. Co-accused namely Gurwinder Singh @ Inder and Sahil Negi had since been allowed regular bail by this Court vide order dated 06.11.2025 and 06.07.2026 respectively. Petitioner was in custody for the last 10 months and 26 days. The case was at initial stage and charges were yet to be framed. Petitioner, though involved in 06 other cases, deserved to be enlarged on regular bail, considering the period of incarceration undergone.

4. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate dated 21.07.2026, which is taken on record. He opposes the prayer for regular bail on the ground that allegations against the petitioner were serious in nature and he was involved in 6 other cases. Considering his antecedents, he did not deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. 5. Petitioner is in custody in this case w.e.f. 25.08.2025 i.e. for the last 10 months and 26 days. Investigation of the case is complete and challan had been presented. Though, petitioner is involved in 6 other cases, he is notSUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-39216-2026 (O&M) -3-

a previous convict. In view of the ratio of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tiwari Vs. State of UP and Anr. 2020(1) RCR (Criminal) 831 and Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and Others 2012(2) SCC 382, involvement of accused in other criminal cases cannot be the sole ground to deny him the concession of bail. Truth of the allegations against the petitioner can be determined only on conclusion of trial, which is likely to take some time to conclude. Considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, the stage of trial which is yet to commence, the petition is allowed. Without a comment on merits of the case, petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 23.07.2026 Sumit Singla Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SUMIT SINGLA 2026.07.23 20:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document