Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32007 (PNJ)

BIKRAMJIT SINGH ALIAS VIKRAM SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/13099/2025 · 2025-05-12

Mahabir Singh Sindhu

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-13099-2025 213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13099-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 12.05.2025 Bikramjit Singh @ Vikram Singh ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Manjot Kaur, AAG, Punjab. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J. Present petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the B.N.S.S.’) has been filed for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No.88 dated 28.11.2021, under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908; Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Bhaini Mian Khan, District Gurdaspur. (2) FIR in question was registered on the basis of secret information against Sonu, Raj Singh and Jasmeet Singh @ Jagga. On receiving the said information, police laid a barricade on 28.11.2021 and apprehended Jasmeet Singh @ Jagga and Raj Singh while coming on a motorcycle. On 01.12.2021, co-accused Sonu was arrested who got recovered a mobile phone having two sims. Co-accused Sonu -1- DIWAKER GULATI 2025.05.13 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13099-2025 suffered a disclosure that he along with petitioner hatched a criminal conspiracy and exploded one grenade in the area of Dasuya Miani Road on the occasion of Gurpurab, which was procured from Pakistan. (3) Learned counsel contends that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 10.03.2025 and in pursuance thereof, he has already joined the investigation; hence, his custodial interrogation is not required. (4) Learned State counsel, on instructions from the quarter concerned, acknowledged the above factual position, and submits that as on today, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. (5) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. (6) It transpires that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 10.03.2025 and the order reads as under:- “Contends that FIR in question was registered on 28.11.2021 against two accused, namely, Raj Singh & Jasmeet Singh, who subsequently nominated one Sonu s/o Gurbachan Singh and ultimately Sonu nominated the present petitioner on the basis of disclosure dated 03.12.2021. Further contends that petitioner never received any notice or summons from the Investigating Officer till 31.12.2024, but now he is apprehending arrest. Notice of motion. Mr. Kunwarbir Singh, learned AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent; seeks time to have instructions and/or to file response in the matter. Posted for 23.04.2025. -2- DIWAKER GULATI 2025.05.13 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13099-2025 In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer; but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing.” (7) It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. (8) In view of the above, there is no justification to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 10.03.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. (9) It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation. (10) The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter. (11) It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 12.05.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) d.gulati JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No -3- DIWAKER GULATI 2025.05.13 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document