CRM-M-34760-2025 -1- 208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34760-2025 DECIDED ON: 11.07.2025 HARPREET SINGH ALIAS HAPPY .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Ms. Ramandeep Kaur Brar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Simran Goria, AAG, Punjab. RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of present petition praying for granting him regular bail in case FIR No.07 dated 14.01.2025 under Sections 109, 132, 221, 191, 190 of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Smalsar, District Moga. 2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that on 14.01.2025, the Police received a secret information that Harvinder Singh @ Happy was standing alongwith his companions, who on previous night had caused injuries to a shopkeeper, namely, Karamjit. They were preparing to cause some another incident and were armed with deadly weapons. On receiving the secret information, a raiding team was constituted and approached the disclosed place. On reaching there, six young persons were found standing on the spot. One of them fired at the police from the pistol which he was holding. In retaliation, the police also fired from their service revolver. One young POONAM NEGI 2025.07.11 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34760-2025 -2- person ran away in the wheat field and the remaining five persons managed to escape on two motorcycles. The Police apprehended for the person who went hiding in the wheat field. On asking, he disclosed his name as Amandeep Singh. Thereafter, the police party nabbed one more person, who disclosed his name as Sukhchain Singh. By the firing of the Police, Sukhchain Singh suffered a bullet injury in his thigh. The FIR was registered and the co-accused were arrested on the spot. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced and the petitioner was arrested on 13.02.2025. He approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga for grant of bail, however, after hearing both the sides, leaned Court declined the bail petition filed by the petitioner vide order dated 14.05.2025. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition 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, Amandeep Singh and Sukhchain Singh. She has drawn the attention of this Court to the common order dated 19.03.2025 passed in CRM-M-13642-2025 and CRM-M-13865-2025, whereby, co-accused, namely, Amandeep Singh and Sukhchain Singh, have been granted regular bail by this Court. She has submitted that the case of the petitioner is at par with the said co-accused and the petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2025. She 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 have already been granted bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State has also endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not POONAM NEGI 2025.07.11 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34760-2025 -3- denied that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Amandeep Singh and Sukhchain Singh. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since 13.02.2025. Co-accused, namely, Amandeep Singh and Sukhchain Singh, are on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with them. 6. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides, 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. 7. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 11.07.2025 JUDGE Poonam Negi Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No POONAM NEGI 2025.07.11 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document