IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 242 CRM-M-36953-2026 Date of Decision: 22.07.2026 Ajit Singh @ Ashu …Petitioner V/s State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.49 dated 18.02.2026 registered under Sections 125 and 324(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNS”) (Sections 61(2), 308(5) and 109 BNS added subsequently) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar, Mohali. 2. Custody certificate 21.07.2026 filed in Court today is taken on record. 3. On a complaint submitted by one Gurjot Singh, the FIR in question was registered. The allegation was that on 17.02.2026, while the complainant was asleep at his house (H. No.138, Sector 69, Mohali), some unknown persons fired multiple rounds at his house and his Mercedes vehicle. The complainant became aware of the incident on the morning of 18.02.2026. The complainant further stated that he had previously received multiple threatening calls and messages from certain individuals claiming to be VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.22 18.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36953-2026 -2- associated with Punjab based gangsters and suspected that the incident may be connected to those threats. During the course of investigation, a suspicious phone number was zeroed in, pursuant to which one Rishav was arrested. He suffered a disclosure statement naming few other persons including the present petitioner and stated that all these persons had conspired to carry out the gun-shot firing with an intention to kill the complainant and to extract money for extortion. He also stated that Rishav and Sukhmanpreet Singh had gone to Madhya Pradesh and had collected four pistols. He further disclosed that a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- had been given to them by one Mandeep Singh for the said purpose. He gave certain other details of the incident as well. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as per the investigating agency, the shots had been fired by co-accused Rishav and Sukhmanpreet Singh, who are already in custody. He submits that the petitioner was named in the disclosure statement of one Mandeep Singh and Davinder Singh, who had also been named by the main accused Rishav. Learned counsel submits that even as per the disclosure statement, the allegation was not that the petitioner was present at the time of the incident but the allegation is that he along with other co-accused had financed the arms and ammunition. He submit that the petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2026; the petitioner has clean antecedents; final report has been submitted and the trial will take a sufficiently long time and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. Still further, learned counsel contends that co-accused namely Sukhwinder Singh @ Sukh has already been granted regular bail vide order dated 02.07.2026 passed in CRM-M-31716-2026. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the State has opposed the bail petition stating that the allegations are very serious. VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.22 18.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36953-2026 -3- 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. Concededly, the petitioner, even as per the disclosure statement, was not present at the time of the incident. He is in custody since 30.04.2026. Final report has been submitted. As to whether he had actually provided some finances or not shall be determined when the trial concludes. No recovery has been made from him. The trial will take a sufficiently long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. Still further, co-accused namely Sukhwinder Singh @ Sukh has already been granted regular bail vide order dated 02.07.2026 passed in CRM- M-31716-2026. 8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE July 22, 2026 vcgarg Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.22 18.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document