Harjeet Singh Alias Harjeet Singh Saini Vs State of Punjab

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 199 dated 17.06.2023 registered under Sections 342, 379-B, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC at Police Tripuri, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶16

The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Satyam Singh, alleging therein that on the night of 12.05.2023, he received a call from his friend Husanpreet Singh Kamboj to come out of his house by offering that they would roam around. On his asking, he came out of his house. Husanpreet Singh reached there in a swift dzire vehicle. Two persons unknown to the complainant were accompanying him. They made the petitioner board their vehicle and after

¶17

Parveen Sharma 2025.04.29 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CRM-M-561-2025 -

¶19

crossing the petrol pump, while being on the road towards Rajpura, Husanpreet Singh and another occupant took out knives and started assaulting the complainant with the same. Thereafter, another unknown person, who was found standing at Ghanaur, Bus stand also boarded the vehicle. Husanpreet Singh handed over his knife to him and he too stabbed the complainant with the same. His phone and cash amount of Rs. 2360/kept in his pocket was taken by Husanpreet Singh. All of them pressurized the complainant to give the password of his google pay account installed in his phone and otherwise extended threat to kill him. Out of fear, he disclosed the same and thereafter, they snatched his silver bracelet, gold chain and while throwing him in the canal, they fled away. The complainant somehow managed to come out of the canal and saved himself. He called his father and was taken to hospital for treatment. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The accused Husanpreet Singh was arrested. He was interrogated and suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime and also disclosed the names of his accomplices. The petitioner was in custody in some other case. His presence was secured by getting production warrant issued. He was arrested on 16.09.2023. Presently, he along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of aforementioned offences.

¶20

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused which cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence. No recovery is to be effected from him. Trial would take sufficient time to conclude. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. He

¶21

Parveen Sharma 2025.04.29 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

CRM-M-561-2025 -

¶23

has not been produced before the learned trial Court and no witness has been examined so far. Therefore, it is argued that he deserves to be extended benefit of bail.

¶24

Status report has been filed by respondent-State. It is argued by learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab that there are serious allegations against the petitioner, who is having criminal antecedents. Three other cases of similar nature have been registered against him. There are chances of his absconding or intimidating the witnesses, if extended benefit of bail. There would be no undue delay in conclusion of the trial. Therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have gone through the record carefully.

¶26

The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have wrongfully confined the complainant, to have caused injuries to him and is further alleged to have looted money from him. He along with the coaccused is alleged to have thrown the complainant into canal to cause disappearance of evidence of offence. He is in custody since 16.09.2023. Trial has not commenced and a copy of zimni orders passed by learned trial Court has been placed on record which shows that the petitioner has not even been regularly produced before the learned trial Court. His involvement in other cases cannot be considered to be a ground to deny benefit of bail to him. Keeping in view the afore-discussed facts and circumstances of the case but without meaning to make any comment on the merits thereof lest they prejudice the trial, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves to be released on bail.

¶27

Parveen Sharma 2025.04.29 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

CRM-M-561-2025

¶29

Accordingly the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the extent of two sureties to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. During trial, he shall appear before the Police Station on the first Monday of every month and shall mark his presence. He shall disclose his present as well as permanent address before the learned trial Court at the time of furnishing of bonds and shall also give copy of his Aadhar Card, PAN Card if any and details of his mobile phone number(s) to the learned trial Court and in case, any change in his address or mobile phone number(s) takes place, then he shall inform about the same to the learned trial Court in advance.

¶30

The concerned SHO shall give immediate intimation to the trial Court, if the petitioner fails to appear before him on first Monday of any month in compliance of the directions issued by this Court and on failure of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶31