CRM-M-35700-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 321 CRM-M-35700-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.07.2026 Jaspal Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Anmol Jeevan S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.260 dated 30.11.2025, registered under Sections 25(6), 25(7) and 25(8) of the Arms Act at Police Station Cantonment, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar, Punjab. 2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that on 30.11.2025, co-accused Gurpreet Singh @ Gopa and Gurbir Singh @ Sonu, who were standing near an unnumbered Splendor motorcycle, were apprehended by a police party. Upon their personal search, one foreign- made .30 bore pistol (PX-5 Storm) was recovered from each of them. Both pistols were seized and a case under the aforementioned provisions of the Arms Act was registered against them. On interrogation, the above named co-accused disclosed that the recovered pistols were supplied to them by the present petitioner. On the basis of the same, the present petitioner was nominated in this case and was arrested on 03.12.2025. Some other persons were also nominated as accused in MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.14 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35700-2026 (O&M) -2- this case. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the disclosure statement of the above named co-accused, which cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence. He was neither named in the FIR nor was found at the spot. Even no recovery has been effected from him. He has clean antecedents. Even otherwise, investigation already stands concluded and the final report has been presented before the trial Court. Conclusion of trial would take considerable time. The petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation and no further recovery remains to be effected from him. The petitioner has remained in custody since 03.12.2025. Main accused Gurbir Singh @ Sonu and Gurpreet Singh have already been granted concession of regular bail by the learned trial Court. Even similarly situated co-accused Rajwinder Singh @ Raju and Gorkha Singh @ Gora @ Gorka have also been granted concession of regular bail. On parity, the petitioner too deserves to be given the same benefit. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be released on regular bail. 4. Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by the respondent- State. Learned State counsel has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations levelled against the, he is not entitled to get benefit of bail. It is, thus, argued that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner is alleged to have supplied the recovered illegal pistols to the co-accused. The petitioner was not named in the FIR and his implication is stated to be on the basis of the disclosure statement made by the co-accused. No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.14 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35700-2026 (O&M) -3- recovery has been effected from the petitioner. Investigation already stands concluded, the final report has been presented before the trial Court and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation. The petitioner has remained in custody since 03.12.2025 and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. Furthermore, the main accused, namely, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopa and Gurbir Singh @ Sonu, as well as similarly situated co-accused Rajwinder Singh @ Raju and Gorkha Singh @ Gora @ Gorka, have already been granted the concession of regular bail. The petitioner also has clean antecedents. The guilt of the petitioner can be established only on thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody anymore. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner is found involved in any other subsequent case. 7. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 14.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.14 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document