IN THE 123 (03 cases) 1. CRM-M- Gurpal Singh @ State of Punjab 2. CRM-M- Jagjit Singh @ Jagga State of Punjab 3. CRM-M- Sarabjit Singh @ State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. in CRM Mr. in CRM Mr. in CRM Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ All FIR No.101 dated 1959 and Section THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6 CRM-M-62765 CRM-M-71951 Date of decision: -62959-2025(O&M) @ Heera VERSUS -62765-2025(O&M) Jagga VERSUS -71951-2025(O&M) @ Dhani VERSUS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate CRM-M-62959-2025. Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner CRM-M-62765-2025. Mr. Karandeep S. Dargan, Advocate CRM-M-71951-2025. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) these three petitions, arising out dated 28.06.2025 registered under Sections Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 62959-2025(O&M) 62765-2025(O&M) 71951-2025(O&M) decision: 17.03.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent ...Petitioner ...Respondent ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ for the petitioner petitioner Advocate for the petitioner Punjab. out of the same case bearing Sections 25 of the Arms Act, Sanhita, 2023 (Section 35 of SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.18 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 123 (03 cases) CRM-M-62959-2025(O&M) CRM-M-62765-2025(O&M) CRM-M-71951-2025(O&M) the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 were added later on) at Police Station Raja Sansi, District Amritsar Rural having been filed by three different accused for seeking grant of regular bail, are hence being decided by a common order. 2. For the facility of reference, facts are however extracted from CRM-M-62959-2025 titled as “Gurpal Singh @ Heera Vs. State of Punjab”. 3. As per the case set up by the prosecution, the police official claimed that one unnumbered Swift car was signaled during a special nakabandi and 03 youngsters were apprehended. On inquiry, the driver disclosed his name as Sarabjit Singh @ Dhani (petitioner in CRM-M-71951- 2025); co-passenger sitting in the front row disclosed his name as Gurpal Singh @ Heera (petitioner in CRM-M-62959-2025) and the person sitting in the rear seat disclosed his name as Jagjit Singh @ Jagga (petitioner in CRM- M-62765-2025). One bag was kept at the feet of the petitioner-Gurpal Singh @ Heera (co-passenger). During the checking of the aforesaid bag, one Glock pistol Gen 19 alongwith magazine, one Glock pistol Gen 26 alongwith magazine, one Glock pistol Gen 43 alongwith magazine and 03 pistols of 30 bore alongwith 08 bullets of 30 bore were recovered from the bag. They could not produce any valid licence for being in possession of the said firearms, hence, the aforesaid FIR was registered. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioners are in custody since 28.06.2025 and have already undergone actual custody of nearly 09 months. They further contend that the trial in the present case is yet to commence and that there are total 18 SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.18 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 123 (03 cases) CRM-M-62959-2025(O&M) CRM-M-62765-2025(O&M) CRM-M-71951-2025(O&M) witnesses cited by the prosecution to be examined, therefore, the conclusion of trial shall take long. They further contend that the petitioners are not involved in any other case under the Arms Act. Insofar as petitioner-Gurpal Singh @ Heera is concerned, he had a case under Section 379 Indian Penal Code, 1860 while Jagjit Singh @ Jagga has no criminal antecedents. One case had been registered against Sarabjit Singh @ Dhani under the NDPS Act for being in possession of intermediate quantity. They further contend that co-accused Jujhar Singh @ Hazara Singh, to whom the weapons had to be delivered, had already been granted concession of regular bail. 5. Learned State Counsel contends that the petitioners were involved in supply of illegal firearms after having secured the same through handlers based in Pakistan. He however does not dispute the facts about the stage of the trial, the period of custody undergone by the petitioners as well as the factum of bail having been granted to Jujhar Singh @ Hazara Singh. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 7. Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into consideration the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, the period of custody already undergone by them as well as the stage of the trial, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petitions. 8. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.18 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 123 (03 cases) CRM-M-62959-2025(O&M) CRM-M-62765-2025(O&M) CRM-M-71951-2025(O&M) 9. It is made clear that the petitioners shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 10. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 17.03.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.18 09:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document