JUDGMENT Raj Mohan Singh , J. - Vide this common order, CRM-M-27784-2020 titled Ramandeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-31286-2020 titled Maur Singh Vs. State of Punjab and CRM-M-39834-2020 titled Rajan Vs. State of Punjab, are being disposed of. 2. The first petition for grant of regular bail filed by Maur Singh-petitioner i.e. CRM-M-24197-2020 was dismissed as withdrawn on 31.08.2020. 3. Crm-M-27784-2020 has been preferred by coaccused Ramandeep Singh, CRM-M-39834-2020 has been preferred by co-accused Rajan whereas CRM-M-31286-2020 has been preferred by Maur Singh, for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.114 dated 03.08.2019 registered under Sections 379-B/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 379-B(2), 411, 201 of IPC has been added later on), at Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar, District Amritsar, Punjab. 4. Since all the criminal miscellaneous petitions have arisen from one FIR, therefore, common facts are being noticed. 5. As per the allegations made by the complainantSatnam Singh, he had come to Amritsar by a vehicle carrying potatoes to receive his cousin Rohit. The vehicle loaded with potatoes, stopped at Vegetable Market, Amritsar. The complainant got out from the vehicle and went to Amritsar Railway Station by foot to receive his cousin. When he reached Maqboolpura crossing, Amritsar, three persons appeared there. One of them was having a sickle in his hand and all the three cordoned him. They threatened the complainant with sickle and took him to nearby street and asked him to handover whatever he was having in his possession, otherwise, they will kill him. One of the person took out an amount of Rs.1800/- from the right side of the pocket and another person took mobile phone from the left side of the pocket of the complainant. The complainant further alleged that later on, he came to know about the person who had snatched his mobile phone. The said person was found to be Maur Singh and the person who had snatched money from his right side of the pocket was found to be Ramandeep Singh and the person who had threatened him was found to be Rajan. The name of Rajbir Singh @ Raju was disclosed by Maur Singh to the extent of alleging that he had given a mobile to Rajbir Singh @ Raju. 6. On the basis of such disclosure statement, offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code was added. The name of Rajbir Singh @ Raju was disclosed by Maur Singh to the extent of alleging that he had given a mobile to Rajbir Singh @ Raju. 6. On the basis of such disclosure statement, offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code was added. Rajbir Singh @ Raju has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 28.07.2020 in CRM-M-18140-2020. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that petitioner-Maur Singh is in custody since 24.09.2019 whereas Ramandeep Singh and Rajan are in custody since 04.08.2019. After filing of the challan and framing of the charges, the prosecution evidence has not started as yet. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that the prosecution evidence could not start owing to the situation arising out of COVID-19. Now, after start of the physical hearing in the trial Court, the prosecution evidence would be led in due course. 9. Keeping in view the custody of the petitioner(s), since August, 2019 and the stage of the trial, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioners on regular bail, without meaning anything on merits of the case. 10. In view of above, all the petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to their furnishing adequate bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/concerned Duty Magistrate. 11. Nothing expressed hereinabove would be construed to be an expression of any opinion on merits of the case.