IN TH 107 MANJIT S STATE OF CORAM: Present :
 1. The appella Court has d arising out 216 IPC, S Unlawful A District Lud 2. The allegati months prio at Jalalaba investigatio IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR CRA Date JIT SINGH @ MANA Versus OF PUNJAB AM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE Mr. Mitul Singh Rana, Advoca
     ****  

, J. (oral) ellant assails order dated 02.08.202 has declined his application seeking g out FIR No. 181 dated 01.11.2021 PC, Sections 3 & 4 of Explosive A ful Activities (Prevention) Act at ct Ludhiana. llegations as per the FIR are broad hs prior to lodging of the present FIR, lalabad, District Fazilka and later tigation of the said case, one Ranjit UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RA-D No.1196 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.03.2026 …. Appellant …. Respondent
 

 ICE     dvocate for the appellant.   .08.2025 vide which learned Special eeking grant of regular bail in case .2021 registered under Sections 212, sive Act and Sections 18 & 19 of ct at Police Station Sidhwan Bet, broadly to the effect that about 02 t FIR, a bomb blast has taken place later during the course of the Ranjit Singh @ Gora came to be ecial case 212, 9 of Bet, t 02 place the be JYOTI 2026.03.14 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA nominated. secret inform @ Gora, wh Jaswant Sin Singh @ Go of explosive is conducted Singh, Ranj 3. Pursuant to house of af Jaswant Sin on 04.11.20 he led the concealed bomb dispo 4. It is further Ranjit Sing Gora and Ja the appella mentioned t happens to Singh @ Go 5. It is furthe interrogatio CRA-D No.1196 of 2025 (O&M) nated. The instant FIR came to be l t information by the police to the effe ra, who was involved in an earlier F Singh, Tirlok Singh and Balwant @ Gora was also carrying arms, amm plosives. The information was further t ducted at the house of Tirlok Singh, th , Ranjit Singh @ Gora and Balwant Si ant to lodging of the aforesaid FIR, of aforesaid Tirlok Singh and from nt Singh were arrested. It is further th .11.2021, pursuant to disclosure state d the police party/bomb disposal tea aled a bomb which was accordingly disposal team and was destroyed. further the case of the prosecution th t Singh @ Gora was also arrested an and Jaswant Singh were interrogated o ppellant Manjit Singh @ Mana as oned that the aforesaid Manjit Singh ns to be son of Jaswant Singh and @ Gora. further the case of the prosecution ogation of the appellant Manjit Singh -2- o be lodged pursuant to receipt of he effect that aforesaid Ranjit Singh rlier FIR, was being harboured by want Singh and that aforesaid Ranjit ammunition and other ingredients rther to the effect that in case, a raid ingh, then said Tirlok Singh, Jaswant ant Singh could be apprehended. FIR, a raid was conducted at the d from where Balwant Singh and rther the case of the prosecution that e statement made by Jaswant Singh, team to the place where he had y recovered and handed over to tion that on 04.11.2021, co-accused sted and that when Ranjit Singh @ gated on 08.11.2021, they nominated as co-accused. It may here be Singh @ Mana (present appellant) h and brother of co-accused Ranjit ecution that during the course of t Singh @ Mana on 11.11.2021, he pt of ingh y anjit ients raid t t the and that h, had er to used h @ ated be llant) anjit e of he JYOTI 2026.03.14 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA disclosed th had taken p Singh @ S allurement o concealed th given the sa 6. Learned co implicated i entire famil Singh and b Tirlok Sing Singh @ Go 7. It has been effect that h carry any ev been got re counsel furt involved in Tirlok Sing the same co      #$    CRA-D No.1196 of 2025 (O&M) sed that his brother Balwinder Singh aken place at Fazilka and that Balw @ Sukha had concealed a bomb ment of money and that he along with aled the said bomb in the fields and t the said Bomb. ed counsel for the appellant subm cated in the present case and in fact, family, inasmuch as two other co- and brother Ranjit Singh @ Gora. It Singh is related to him being fathe @ Gora. been further submitted that the alleg that he along with his father had co any evidentiary value at all, inasmuch got recovered at the instance of his f el further submits that the appellant ved in any other case and since the c Singh have already been granted ba me concession on the ground of parity          ! "#'  $ %         ' )   -3- ingh had died in a bomb blast which Balwinder Singh and Sukhwinder bomb in his house by giving the g with his father Jaswant Singh had and that Parveen Kumar was to be submits that he has falsely been n fact, the Police have roped in the -accused are his father Jaswant It has been submitted that Even father-in-law of his brother Ranjit alleged disclosure statement to the had concealed the bomb would not smuch as the said bomb had already f his father Jaswant Singh. Learned ellant has a clean record and is not the co-accused Balwant Singh and ted bail, the appellant also deserves f parity.-                 ' ( (    &     * + !,  hich inder the had to be been the want Even anjit o the not eady rned not and s        JYOTI 2026.03.14 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA (    8. Opposing th the appellan and storing was recover father, appa quiet. It has witness hav trial Court f certificate o undergone stated to be 9. We have he 10. Admittedly, basis of dis father makin considered appellant hi be debatable bomb which said stateme circumstanc appellant on CRA-D No.1196 of 2025 (O&M) '       (( sing the appeal, learned State counsel pellant was involved in nefarious activ toring and supplying of bombs and ecovered from house of the appellant, , apparently, the appellant knew abou It has been informed that out of cite ss have already been examined and th ourt for 24.03.2026. Learned State co icate of the appellant dated 12.03.2026 gone an actual custody of 02 years, 01 to be involved in any other case. ave heard rival submissions addressed ttedly, the appellant came to be nom disclosure statement made by no making statement against his son incu dered very cautiously. As far as the himself is concerned, the admissi batable, inasmuch as the said statemen which in fact, had already been recov tatement. The appellant otherwise ha stance, we are of the opinion that lant on regular bail during the penden -4-        ounsel submits that entire family of activities including making bombs that given the fact that a bomb ellant, although at the instance of his w about the same but had remained of cited 21 prosecution witnesses, 7 and that trial is now fixed before the tate counsel has today filed custody 3.2026 indicating that he has already ars, 01 month and 07 days. He is not ressed before this Court. e nominated as an accused on the by none else but his real father. A inculpating him, would have to be as the disclosure statement of the dmissibility of the same would also atement pertains to concealment of a recovered prior to the making of the ise has a clean record. Under these that it is a fit case to release the endency of the trial. As such, while  ly of s b f his ined 7 e the tody eady s not the r. A to be f the also a f the these e the hile JYOTI 2026.03.14 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA accepting th ordered to b .     /     
  CRA-D No.1196 of 2025 (O&M) ting the appeal, the impugned order is ed to be released on regular bail sub   /       (  /0 
   (  ( 12  
  Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable : -5- rder is set aside and the appellant is il subject to payment of   (    ((      
 

 
     
 Yes/No. Yes/No nt is    JYOTI 2026.03.14 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document