Gurcharan Singh Alias Sahil Vs State of Punjab

The pe��oner apprehending arrest in the FIR cap�oned above has come up before this Court under Sec�on 482 of Bhara�ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking an�cipatory bail.

¶15

In paragraph 9 of the bail pe��on, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶16

The facts and allega�ons are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:

¶17

4(a) That FIR in this case was registered on the statement of Dhanraj son of Rameshwar Lal son of Loona Ram resident of Radha Swami Colony, Street No. 5, Fazilka sta%ng that on 19.07.2024 at about 10.30 pm, a/er closing his halwai shop situated at Sacha Sauda Road, Banzara Chowk, Fazilka, he came home for having his dinner. When a/er having his dinner, he reached the shop at about 11.30 pm, he no%ced that the ven%lator of the shop/factory was lying broken and when he checked his office room, he no%ced that the wooden cash box was missing. The window of the office was also open. The cash box contained cash amount of Rs.1,10,000/-as well as important documents- LIC documents, registery of house, PAN card, Bank cheque books, car papers, GST papers, ATM

¶18

JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶19

1

¶20

CRM-M-1651-2025

¶21

card, credit card, some old cards, documents of his children etc. He kept on searching for the thieves and now he came to know that Balkar Singh, Sahil and two unknown persons have commi=ed the/ in their shop. On the basis of said statement, FIR No.126 dated 24.07.2024, under Sec%on 331(4),305 of Bhar%ya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S)2023 was registered at Police Sts%on City Fazilka against the pe%toner and above said coaccused.”

¶22

The pe��oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi�ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera�on would cause an irreversible injus�ce to the pe��oner and his family.

¶23

The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.

¶24

It would be appropriate to refer to the following por�ons of the reply, which read as follows:

¶25

“6. That it is respecBully submi=ed that all the accused including present pe%%oner, have commi=ed above noted heinous crime. Therefore, custodial interroga%on of the pe%%oner being the member of their gang is necessary for the proper inves%ga%on of the case and to decode the modus operandi adopted by all the accused. Therefore, the pe%%oner is not at all en%tled to the concession of an%cipatory bail. No cause of ac%on has accrued to the pe%%oner to file the present pe%%oner. Hence, the present pe%%on is liable to be dismissed.”

¶26

REASONING:

¶27

Pre-trial incarcera�on should not be a replica of post-convic�on sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecu�on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of an�cipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jus�fy custodial interroga�on or pretrial incarcera�on.

¶28

Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega�ons and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus�fiability for custodial interroga�on or the pre-trial incarcera�on at this stage. Without commen�ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men�oned above, the pe��oner makes a case for bail.

¶29

Given above, provided the pe��oner is not required in any other case, the

¶30

JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶31

2

¶32

CRM-M-1651-2025

¶33

pe��oner shall be released on an�cipatory bail in the FIR cap�oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa�sfac�on of the Arres�ng Officer, and if the maFer is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep�ng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sa�sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶34

While furnishing a personal bond, the pe��oner shall men�on the following personal iden�fica�on details:

¶35

AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the aFes�ng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

¶36

Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available)

¶37

This order is subject to the pe��oner’s complying with the following terms.

¶38

The pe%%oner is directed to join the inves%ga%on within seven days of uploading

¶39

this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Inves%gator. The pe��oner shall be in deemed custody for Sec�on 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Sec�on 23 of BSA, 2023. The pe��oner shall join the inves�ga�on as and when called by the Inves�ga�ng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the inves�ga�on at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecu�on will be open to seeking cancella�on of the bail. During the inves�ga�on, the pe��oner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶40

The pe��oner shall abide by all statutory bond condi�ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe��oner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

¶41

In case the Inves�gator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Sta�on arraigns another sec�on of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new sec�on prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sec�ons men�oned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added sec�on(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sec�ons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sec�ons men�oned above; then, in

¶42

JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶43

3

¶44

CRM-M-1651-2025

¶45

that case, the Inves�gator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the pe��oner no�ce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

¶46

This bail is condi�onal, and the founda�onal condi�on is that if the pe��oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applica�on for cancella�on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

¶47

The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above condi�ons and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law.

¶48

Any observa�on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶49

A cer�fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe��oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aFest it to be a true copy. If the aFes�ng officer wants to verify its authen�city, such an officer can also verify its authen�city and may download and use the downloaded copy for aFes�ng bonds.

¶50

Pe//on allowed in terms men�oned above. All pending applica�ons, if any, stand disposed of.

¶51

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 14.02.2025 Jyo�-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

¶52

JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶53

4

Gurcharan Singh Alias Sahil v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurcharan Singh Alias Sahil v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Khanna Vs State of Punjab

Sukhbir Vs State of Haryana

Jagbir Vs Sukhbir and Ors.

Sukhwant Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Varinder Singh Vs State of Punjab