CRM-M-46763- CRM-M-4664-20 IN THE H (217) SURAJ SINGH STATE OF PUNJ (316) DANISH GILL STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. (in CR Mr. V (in CR Mr. R MANISHA BATR 1. This petitions which ha -2025 (O&M) 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH
GH Versus
PUNJAB Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advoc (in CRM-M-46763-2025) Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the (in CRM-M-4664-2026) Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
This common order shall dispose ich have been respectively filed by th JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-46763-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.02.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent CRM-M-4664-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.02.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA
Advocate for the petitioner or the petitioner Punjab ispose of the aforementioned two d by the petitioners Suraj Singh and 2026 oner
dent 2026 oner
dent two and AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.06 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46763- CRM-M-4664-20 Danish Gill under short “BNSS”) for 28.10.2023 regist Section 25, 27 a Amritsar. 2. Brief that the aforement by the complaina 27.10.2023, he al vehicle to attend s Rakesh Kumar and containing his dia written. When th suddenly three yo rider pounced upo and then they esca in his right hand. vehicle on the gro persons and the vi the firearm injury proceedings were proceedings were 3. As p accused Rajinder -2025 (O&M) 2026 (O&M) 2 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagar for grant of regular bail in case ar registered under Sections 302, 379 27 and 29 of Arms Act at Police Brief facts relevant for the purpose of rementioned FIR was registered on th plainant Avinash Malhotra alleging he alongwith the victim Rakesh Ku nd some Jagran program. The veh ar and he was a pillion rider. He was his diary in which bhajans to be re hen they were moving on the road ree youths came riding on a motorbi ed upon him and took away his bag. escaped. While going, the driver hand. The bullet hit Rakesh Kumar a the ground. The clamour raised by th the victim was rushed to the hospita ury sustained by him. After regi were initiated. Postmortem examina were conducted. As per the further allegations, the jinder Singh @ Ashu was arrested in Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for ase arising out of FIR No.217 dated , 379B(2), 120B, 34 of IPC and Police Station Civil Lines, District ose of disposal of these petitions are on the basis of statement recorded leging therein that on the night of sh Kumar was going on his Activa vehicle was driven by the victim e was holding a black coloured bag be recited in the Jagran had been ad towards Sukh Sagar Hospital, otorbike from behind. The pillion bag. The complainant raised alarm iver fired a shot with a weapon held mar and he fell down alongwith the d by the complainant attracted other ospital. However, he succumbed to er registration of FIR, investigation amination of dead body and inquest , the petitioners alongwith the co- ted in some other case bearing FIR (for ated and strict are rded ht of ctiva ictim bag been pital, illion larm held h the other ed to ation quest - FIR AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.06 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46763- CRM-M-4664-20 No.216 dated 28.1 interrogation, they this case and had joined into investi involvement. It w the pistol thereby complainant. Th stands concluded offences. 4. It is a petitioners have disclosure stateme case which canno named in the FIR not identified any stated that the peti offences. The ot supported the pros to conclude as on further detention other cases cannot them. The co-acc they too deserve t be allowed. -2025 (O&M) 2026 (O&M) 3 d 28.10.2023 registered at Police Stat n, they suffered disclosure statements d had been nominated as accused in nvestigation and again suffered disclo t. It was also disclosed that the petitio ereby hitting the victim and all of the t. They were identified by the com luded and they are facing trial for c It is argued by learned counsel for t have been falsely implicated in th tatement allegedly suffered by them i cannot be considered to be admissible e FIR. The complainant, who was th d any of them while appearing in th he petitioners’ were not the persons w he other witnesses Mukesh Kumar e prosecution version. The trial is li as only 05 out of 23 witnesses has ntion would not serve any useful pu cannot be considered to be a reason fo accused has already been extende erve the same benefit. It is thus, urge e Station Civil Lines, Amritsar. On ments admitting their involvement in ed in this case as well. They were disclosure statements admitting their petitioner Suraj had fired a shot with hem had snatched bag from the e complainant. Investigation now for commission of aforementioned l for the petitioners that both of the in this case on the basis of the them in some other case and in this issible in evidence. They were not was the star witness of the case has in the Court and has categorically sons who had committed the subject umar and Asha Rani have also not al is likely to take considerable time s has been examined so far. Their ful purpose. Their involvement in son for denying the benefit of bail to xtended benefit of bail. On parity, s, urged that the petition deserves to . On nt in were their with the now oned f the the this e not e has cally bject not time heir nt in ail to arity, es to AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.06 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46763- CRM-M-4664-20 5. Per c keeping in view th they do not deserv 6. This parties. 7. The p homicidal death o carried by the com and had been inv stated to have b However, now the petitioners as the a the witness to the husband has denie instance of the pet on similar footing assessment of the involvement of th allegedly used by detention of the p consideration all t the considered opi to them at this stag any fruitful purpo -2025 (O&M) 2026 (O&M) 4 Per contra, learned State counsel iew the gravity of the allegations as deserve to be extended benefit of bail. This Court has heard the rival sub The petitioners alongwith the co-accu eath of the victim Rakesh Kumar, af he complainant Avinash Malhotra. Th en involved in this case on the basis ave been suffered by them during ow the complainant stands examined s the assailants. Even PW-2 Asha Ra to the identification of the wallet and s denied that any such article was rec the petitioners. Co-accused Rajinder S footing has been extended benefit of of the evidence to be produced on re t of the petitioner Suraj in causing d sed by him can be drawn and not a f the petitioners would not serve any n all the above discussed facts and c ed opinion that the petitioners have m is stage. The continued detention of t purpose. Accordingly, the petitions a unsel has vehemently argued that ns as levelled against the petitioners, bail. al submissions made by both the accused are alleged to have caused ar, after snatching a bag allegedly ra. They were not named in the FIR e basis of the disclosure statements uring the course of investigation. mined and he has not identified the ha Rani wife of the victim, who was et and identity card belonging to her as recovered in her presence at the inder Singh @ Ashu whose case was efit of bail. It is only on thorough on record that any inference as to sing death of the victim by firearm not at this stage. The continued e any fruitful purpose. Taking into and circumstances, this Court is of ave made out a case for grant of bail on of the petitioners would not serve tions are allowed and the petitioners that , the used edly FIR s tion. d the was o her the was ough as to earm nued into is of f bail serve ners AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.06 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46763- CRM-M-4664-20 are ordered to be surety bonds to Magistrate/Duty M 8. In the petitioners, it shall application seekin 9. It is, be construed as a and shall not influ 10. Since any, is rendered in 11. A pho 05.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 2026 (O&M) 5 to be released on bail subject to their s to the satisfaction of the learne uty Magistrate concerned. In the event of there being any FIR it shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petitions have been ered infructuous. A photocopy of this order be placed i (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
their furnishing personal as well as learned trial Court/Chief Judicial y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner.
allowed, pending application, if laced in another connected case. (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
ll as icial t the g an l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.06 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.