CRM-M-7968-2026 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. Mr. Hardeep Hans, AAG Punjab. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This is Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 petitioner in case FIR No. 351(2) and 62 BNS (Section 111 BNS and S added later on) at Police Station 2. As per the prosecution version, on 09.10.2025, a police party headed by ASI Nirmal Singh was present for checking of suspicious persons Mandi, Banga. At about 06:00 PM, a secret informer informed the police that Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit, who allegedly works at the behest of Jaspreet Singh @ Jassa and Rajesh Kumar @ Sonu Khatri, both stated to be residing abroad, was involve them. The informer further disclosed that the accused was sitting at a passenger shed near the bridge of Village Happowal while carrying a weapon. the said information, a ruqa was sent t 2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit VERSUS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Ritesh K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hardeep Hans, AAG Punjab. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This is the first petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 106, dated 09.10.2025 351(2) and 62 BNS (Section 111 BNS and Sections 25/27/54 at Police Station City Banga District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar As per the prosecution version, on 09.10.2025, a police party headed by ASI Nirmal Singh was present for checking of suspicious persons Mandi, Banga. At about 06:00 PM, a secret informer informed the police that Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit, who allegedly works at the behest of Jaspreet Singh @ Jassa and Rajesh Kumar @ Sonu Khatri, both stated to be residing abroad, was involved in extorting money from innocent persons by threatening them. The informer further disclosed that the accused was sitting at a passenger shed near the bridge of Village Happowal while carrying a weapon. the said information, a ruqa was sent to the police station for registration of the FIR -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-7968-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 11.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU , Advocate for the petitioner. petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya for grant of the concession of regular bail to the 09.10.2025, registered under Section 308(2), ections 25/27/54 of Arms Act 1959 City Banga District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar As per the prosecution version, on 09.10.2025, a police party headed by ASI Nirmal Singh was present for checking of suspicious persons near Sabji Mandi, Banga. At about 06:00 PM, a secret informer informed the police that Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit, who allegedly works at the behest of Jaspreet Singh @ Jassa and Rajesh Kumar @ Sonu Khatri, both stated to be residing d in extorting money from innocent persons by threatening them. The informer further disclosed that the accused was sitting at a passenger shed near the bridge of Village Happowal while carrying a weapon. Acting upon o the police station for registration of the FIR petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya for grant of the concession of regular bail to the 308(2), 1959 City Banga District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar. As per the prosecution version, on 09.10.2025, a police party headed near Sabji Mandi, Banga. At about 06:00 PM, a secret informer informed the police that Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit, who allegedly works at the behest of Jaspreet Singh @ Jassa and Rajesh Kumar @ Sonu Khatri, both stated to be residing d in extorting money from innocent persons by threatening them. The informer further disclosed that the accused was sitting at a passenger Acting upon o the police station for registration of the FIR TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7968-2026 and a raid was conducted at the disclosed spot. During the raid, the petitioner Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit was apprehended and upon his personal search, one illegal country recovered from his possession. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and has undergone twenty-six days. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery has already been effected and no further recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It is also contended that four other co the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude. On these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner be granted the concession of regular bail. 4. On the othe filed in Court, opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. He submits that a country-made pistol along with nine live cartridges was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and therefore considering the seriousness of the allegations, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 6. It is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and has undergone custody for more weapon has already been effected and no further recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that other co accused in the present case are yet to be appre likely to conclude in the near future. 2026 (O&M) and a raid was conducted at the disclosed spot. During the raid, the petitioner Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit was apprehended and upon his personal search, one illegal country-made pistol along with nine liv recovered from his possession. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and has undergone incarceration for about four months and six days. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery has already been effected and no further recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It is also contended that four other co-accused named in the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude. On these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner be granted the concession of regular bail. On the other hand, learned State counsel filed in Court, opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. He submits that a made pistol along with nine live cartridges was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and therefore considering the seriousness of the tions, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the It is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and has undergone custody for more than four months. The alleged recovery of the weapon has already been effected and no further recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that other co accused in the present case are yet to be apprehended and therefore the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. -2- and a raid was conducted at the disclosed spot. During the raid, the petitioner Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit was apprehended and upon his personal search, made pistol along with nine live cartridges was allegedly Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the petitioner is in custody incarceration for about four months and six days. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery has already been effected and no further recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It accused named in the FIR are still at large and the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude. On these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner be granted the concession of regular bail. r hand, learned State counsel relying upon the status report filed in Court, opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. He submits that a made pistol along with nine live cartridges was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and therefore considering the seriousness of the tions, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the It is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and than four months. The alleged recovery of the weapon has already been effected and no further recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that other co hended and therefore the trial is not and a raid was conducted at the disclosed spot. During the raid, the petitioner Vishal Sharma @ Vishal Pandit was apprehended and upon his personal search, e cartridges was allegedly Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the petitioner is in custody incarceration for about four months and six days. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery has already been effected and no further recovery is to be made from the petitioner. It the FIR are still at large and the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude. On these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner be granted the concession of regular bail. he status report filed in Court, opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. He submits that a made pistol along with nine live cartridges was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and therefore considering the seriousness of the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the It is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025 and than four months. The alleged recovery of the weapon has already been effected and no further recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that other co- hended and therefore the trial is not TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7968-2026 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner as well as the fact that the investigation q the opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. 8. Consequently, the present petition is ordered to be released on surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 9. However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 10. All March 11, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2026 (O&M) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner as well as the fact that the investigation qua the recovery stands completed, this Court is of the opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful Consequently, the present petition is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -3- Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner as well as ua the recovery stands completed, this Court is of the opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ct to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner as well as ua the recovery stands completed, this Court is of the opinion that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful and the petitioner is ct to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document