IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 210 GURBHEJ SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 petitioner in case FIR No. 473 and 411 of 1959, registered at Police Station (Annexure P- 2. Akashdeep Singh brother Abhishek Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghudu, Krison, Gurbhej Singh @ Bheja herein) – arrived on two motorcycles and allegedly fired shots Singh, striking him on the head and chest before fleeing. The injured was taken to a hospital, where he was declared ‘brought dead’. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM- Date of decision: GURBHEJ SINGH @ BHEJA Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. The instant petition has been Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 petitioner in case FIR No.3 dated 01.01.2021 473 and 411 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, , registered at Police Station Jandiala -1). As per the FIR (Annexure P- Akashdeep Singh, on 01.01.2021, while he was conversing with his younger brother Abhishek Singh, four persons namely Baljit Singh @ Bulli, Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghudu, Krison, Gurbhej Singh @ Bheja arrived on two motorcycles and allegedly fired shots , striking him on the head and chest before fleeing. The injured was taken to a hospital, where he was declared ‘brought dead’. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -M-41721-2024 Date of decision: August 12, 2025 .....Petitioner .....Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab. has been filed under Section 483 of for grant of regular bail to the 01.01.2021 under Sections 302, 120-B, and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, Jandiala, District SAS Amritsar -1) lodged on the statement of 1.2021, while he was conversing with his younger Singh, four persons namely Baljit Singh @ Bulli, Sukhwinder Singh @ Ghudu, Krison, Gurbhej Singh @ Bheja (petitioner arrived on two motorcycles and allegedly fired shots at Abhishek , striking him on the head and chest before fleeing. The injured was taken to a hospital, where he was declared ‘brought dead’. The motive, as Petitioner .....Respondent filed under Section 483 of for grant of regular bail to the B, and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, Amritsar 1) lodged on the statement of 1.2021, while he was conversing with his younger Singh, four persons namely Baljit Singh @ Bulli, (petitioner Abhishek , striking him on the head and chest before fleeing. The injured was Jaspreet Kaur 2025.08.13 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-41721 alleged, was that Krison suspected with his girlfriend 3. result of a mala fide implicated. It is further submitted that the petitioner stands footing with co regular bail petitioner has been in custody since presented on 13.11.2022 witnesses including the complainant/eyewitness have already been examined; all have failed to denied the involvement of the petitioner been submitted that in his testimony, the complainant stated that the assailants were unknown persons with covered faces and that present in Court were not one of deceased. It has also been asserted by the learned counsel that other key witnesses, PW2 the petitioner as being on since about 28 possibility of the trial concluding in the near future, and hence, the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 41721-2024 was that Krison suspected Abhishek Singh of having a with his girlfriend. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends result of a mala fide intention and that the petitioner has been falsely It is further submitted that the petitioner stands footing with co-accused, who have already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated petitioner has been in custody since 21.08.2022, and the challan was presented on 13.11.2022; out of 39 prosecution witnesses, all four material witnesses including the complainant/eyewitness have already been examined; all have failed to support the prosecution denied the involvement of the petitioner in the crime in question. been submitted that in his testimony, the complainant stated that the assailants were unknown persons with covered faces and that present in Court were not one of those who attacked his brother i.e. the deceased. It has also been asserted by the learned counsel that other key PW2-Gurjit Singh and PW3-Karanbir Singh the petitioner as being one of the assailants. Learned counsel submits that 28 prosecution witnesses still remain to be examined, there is no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future, and hence, the petitioner be enlarged on bail. -2- Abhishek Singh of having a relationship Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR is a intention and that the petitioner has been falsely It is further submitted that the petitioner stands on identical accused, who have already been granted the concession of by this Court vide order dated 29.09.2023. Furthermore, the 21.08.2022, and the challan was ; out of 39 prosecution witnesses, all four material witnesses including the complainant/eyewitness have already been support the prosecution and have categorically in the crime in question. It has also been submitted that in his testimony, the complainant stated that the assailants were unknown persons with covered faces and that the accused those who attacked his brother i.e. the deceased. It has also been asserted by the learned counsel that other key Karanbir Singh have also not named e of the assailants. Learned counsel submits that prosecution witnesses still remain to be examined, there is no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future, and hence, the petitioner relationship that the FIR is a intention and that the petitioner has been falsely on identical accused, who have already been granted the concession of Furthermore, the 21.08.2022, and the challan was ; out of 39 prosecution witnesses, all four material witnesses including the complainant/eyewitness have already been and have categorically It has also been submitted that in his testimony, the complainant stated that the the accused those who attacked his brother i.e. the deceased. It has also been asserted by the learned counsel that other key have also not named e of the assailants. Learned counsel submits that prosecution witnesses still remain to be examined, there is no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future, and hence, the petitioner Jaspreet Kaur 2025.08.13 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-41721 4. and submissions made by the counsel oppos this Court to the FIR named in the FIR able to dispute, on instructions, that the complainant been declared hostile during trial as they had failed to identify the petitioner as being one of the alleged assailants. disputed by the 5. relevant material placed on record. 6. examined to date, including the complainant Akashde supported the case the petitioner in the crime in question. the identification of the petitioner as one of the 7. petitioner, have already been granted regular bail by this Court petitioner has been in custody since 21.08.2022, i.e. for over the trial is still underway with 28 prosecution witnes The question of the petitioner’s culpability, if any, is a matter for the learned trial Court to 41721-2024 Per contra, learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel oppos this Court to the FIR and submitted that the petitioner was specifically named in the FIR and clearly attributed a role. able to dispute, on instructions, that all the four material witnesses includi the complainant (brother of the deceased and an alleged eyewitnes n declared hostile during trial as they had failed to identify the petitioner as being one of the alleged assailants. The stage of the trial has also not been ed by the learned State counsel, on instructions. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record. It is an admitted position that all four material witnesses examined to date, including the complainant Akashde the case of the prosecution and have denied the involvement of tioner in the crime in question. Their testimonies specifically disown the identification of the petitioner as one of the It is further undisputed that co-accused, similarly situated to the petitioner, have already been granted regular bail by this Court petitioner has been in custody since 21.08.2022, i.e. for over the trial is still underway with 28 prosecution witnes The question of the petitioner’s culpability, if any, is a matter for the learned trial Court to determine upon full appreciation of ocular and documentary -3- , learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, has drawn the attention of and submitted that the petitioner was specifically and clearly attributed a role. However, he has not been all the four material witnesses including (brother of the deceased and an alleged eyewitness) had n declared hostile during trial as they had failed to identify the petitioner The stage of the trial has also not been State counsel, on instructions. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the that all four material witnesses examined to date, including the complainant Akashdeep Singh, have not of the prosecution and have denied the involvement of Their testimonies specifically disown the identification of the petitioner as one of the assailants. accused, similarly situated to the petitioner, have already been granted regular bail by this Court. The petitioner has been in custody since 21.08.2022, i.e. for over 28 months, and the trial is still underway with 28 prosecution witnesses yet to be examined. The question of the petitioner’s culpability, if any, is a matter for the learned e upon full appreciation of ocular and documentary , learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer drawn the attention of and submitted that the petitioner was specifically However, he has not been ng had n declared hostile during trial as they had failed to identify the petitioner The stage of the trial has also not been I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the that all four material witnesses , have not of the prosecution and have denied the involvement of Their testimonies specifically disown accused, similarly situated to the The months, and ses yet to be examined. The question of the petitioner’s culpability, if any, is a matter for the learned Jaspreet Kaur 2025.08.13 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-41721 evidence. At this stage, further incarceration of the petitioner, in the face of hostile testimony purpose. 8. Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner as the trial would take considerable time to conclude. 9. be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 10. shall not be construed to be an expression of o case. 11. the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to approach this Court to seek cancellation of bail to him. August 12, 2025 Jaspreet Kaur 41721-2024 evidence. At this stage, further incarceration of the petitioner, in the face of hostile testimony from all key prosecution witnesses, would serve no useful In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner as the trial would take considerable time to conclude. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of o Needless to add here, in case the petitioner is found misusing the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to approach this Court to seek cancellation of bail to him. August 12, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -4- evidence. At this stage, further incarceration of the petitioner, in the face of prosecution witnesses, would serve no useful facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner as the trial would take considerable time to conclude. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed, and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the Needless to add here, in case the petitioner is found misusing the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to approach this Court to (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No evidence. At this stage, further incarceration of the petitioner, in the face of prosecution witnesses, would serve no useful facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner as and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove inion on the merits of the Needless to add here, in case the petitioner is found misusing the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to approach this Court to Jaspreet Kaur 2025.08.13 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh