CRM-M-32118-2025 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 237 CRM-M-32118-2025 Date of decision: 7th July, 2025 Ravi Maninder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Ms. Amarjot Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. *** MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL):- The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 136 dated 23.10.2024 registered under Sections 109, 111, 308(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 112 and 111(5) of BNS added later on) at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement got recorded by the complainant Randeep Singh, alleging therein that on 23.10.2024, he along with his assistant Akash was present in his medical store, when one youth reached there and gave him a signal to come outside and when the complainant reached near him, he took out a pistol and Parveen Sharma 2025.07.08 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32118-2025 2- fired a shot towards the complainant thereby injuring his left thigh. The complainant raised clamour and on hearing the same, his brother rushed for his rescue and then the assailants fled away. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, a secret information was received that the accused Anmoldeep Singh was the person who had made an attempt to murder the victim and after the occurrence, co- accused Manjit Kaur, who is mother of the above said accused along with her husband had provided shelter and motor bike to the accused and they were fully aware about the incident. Offence under Section 111(5) of BNS was added. During the investigation, the present petitioner was nominated as an accused, on the disclosure statement of co-accused Amritpal Singh @ Ambi, on the allegation that he accompanied co-accused Jobanpreet Singh to reach at the spot and provided logistic support to him. He was arrested on 13.01.2025. Investigation now stands concluded. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case, on the basis of disclosure statement suffered by the co-accused which cannot be considered to be admissible against him. He is in custody since 29.08.2024. Trial is likely to take time. No direct incriminating evidence has come on record to connect the petitioner with the subject crime. Co-accused Kamaljeet Singh @ Kamal, Ravi Masih @ Ravi, Lakhandeep Singh @ Warris, Manga Masih, Rajdeep Singh @ Raja, Baljit Singh, Balbir Singh, Manjit Kaur and Navtej Singh, whose case was on similar footing, have been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he too deserves to be released on bail. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. Parveen Sharma 2025.07.08 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32118-2025 3- 4. Notice of motion. 5. Learned State counsel has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter. He has placed on record copy of the custody certificate and has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner who being a member of an organized gang had done reiki for the accused Jobanpreet Singh. He is involved in several other cases. There are chances of him intimidating the witnesses or absconding, if extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, urged that he does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have gone through the record carefully. 6. The petitioner is alleged to be a member of an organized crime syndicate for committing offences of extortion. As per the allegations, he had done reiki of the complainant before attempt to kill him, had been made by the co-accused. He is in custody since 29.08.2024. Trial is likely to take time. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Co-accused, against whom similar allegations have been levelled, have already been granted concession of bail by this Court. Keeping in view the nature of allegations as levelled against the petitioner coupled with the circumstance that the trial would take time as well as the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail, I am of the considered opinion that he deserves to be released on bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. Parveen Sharma 2025.07.08 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32118-2025 4- 7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 8. Since the main petition has been allowed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. [MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE 7th July, 2025 Parveen Sharma 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No Parveen Sharma 2025.07.08 18:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document