CRM-M-29208-2025 1 213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29208-2025 Date of decision : 29.05.2025 Sanjeev Kumar @ Nannu ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Ms. Palvi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Arora, D.A.G., Punjab. RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral) 1. Present petition has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.137 dated 01.11.2022, under Sections 307, 353, 186, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25, 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Bhogpur, District Jalandhar Rural. 2. Succinctly, the present FIR was lodged on the statement of Inspector Surinder Kumar, SHO, Phillaur, Jalandhar Rural, alleging that on 01.11.2022, he along with his Police party had raided the house of the co-accused in connection with the investigation of case FIR No.315 dated 28.10.2022, registered under Sections 379-B, 216-A IPC and Sections 25, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar, on the backside of HP Hamara Petrol Pump. A Police party from Delhi Police was also accompanying them. In the meanwhile, 5-6 unknown persons, who were armed with the weapons, started firing at the Police party. In defence, the SHO fired 02 shots from his service pistol and 03 unknown persons started running from the spot while firing back at the Police party. POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.29 20:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-29208-2025 2 With the help of a drone camera, they were searched and the Police Party was successful in arresting 03 accused, i.e. Sanjiv Kumar @ Nanu (petitioner), Sandeep Kumar @ Sabi and Gurbeer Singh @ Ginni. On conducting search of the petitioner, one pistol Glock 9 MM was recovered from his left side pocket along with a magazine and on unloading, 04 live cartridges were found in the same. Similar recovery was effected from other 02 co-accused. The petitioner and co-accused were arrested on the spot. Upon registration of the FIR, investigation commenced. The petitioner approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for grant of bail, however, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, same was declined vide its order dated 17.01.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached this Court praying for grant of bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the co- accused, namely, Sandeep Singh @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sabi. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 25.02.2025 passed in CRM-M-64713-2024, whereby, co-accused, namely, Sandeep Singh @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sabi, has been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the case of the petitioner is at par with the said co- accused. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.11.2022. He submits that on the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail as the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said co- accused, who has already been granted bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State has endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Sandeep Singh @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sabi. He has produced the custody certificate POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.29 20:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-29208-2025 3 of the petitioner on record. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since 01.11.2022. petitioner along with co-accused fired at the Police party, however, there is no allegation that anyone suffered injury in the present case. The investigation is already complete and the charges are framed. Investigation is complete and co-accused, namely, Sandeep Singh @ Sandeep Kumar @ Sabi, is on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with him. 6. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. The trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. Thus, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case and that the case of the petitioner is at par with that of co-accused, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 29.05.2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) ps-I JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.29 20:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document