Dismissed¶51

Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Mar 2026CRA-D/377/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail appeal dismissed - UAPA Ss.17/18/20 + 120-B IPC + Arms Act 25/54/59; alleged Babbar Khalsa International / target-killing conspiracy (Amrit Bal, Jaggu Bhagwanpuria, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma); mobile-forensic link (Amrit Bal's number saved as 'Canada'); prosecution sanction U/S 45 UAP Act; 3 years 30 days custody and three prior FIRs held insufficient for bail; UOI v. Barakathullah (2024 INSC 452; [2024] 5 SCR 1011) relied on re S.43(D)(5) bar; Punjab & Haryana High Court; CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M); Justice Anoop Chitkara; Justice Sukhvinder Kaur; trial expedited; observations non-opinional.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant: the order rejecting bail was upheld and the appeal dismissed; the trial was directed to be expedited and all pending applications were disposed of. ¶51

Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey Vs State of Punjab — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the appellant: the order rejecting bail was upheld and the appeal dismissed; the trial was directed to be expedited and all pending applications were disposed of.

¶51

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey, is entitled to regular bail in FIR No.2 dated 11.01.2023 (PS State Special Operation Cell, SAS Nagar) under Sections 120-B IPC, 25/54/59 of Arms Act and Sections 17, 18 & 20 of UAP Act. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

Given the material (including mobile-phone data showing the number of accused Amrit Bal saved in the appellant's phone under the name 'Canada', connecting him with Nishan Singh and Amrit Bal), there is sufficient prima facie evidence against the appellant and he is not entitled to bail on merits.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

The appellant's custody of 03 years and 30 days (custody certificate dated 23.02.2026) does not entitle him to bail even on the ground of custody.

¶42

Key takeaways

The observations made in the judgment are neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.obiter¶50

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (CRA-D-377-2024 O&M; Anoop Chitkara & Sukhvinder Kaur JJ.; pronounced 16.03.2026) dismissed the regular-bail appeal of Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey, arrested on 19.1.2023 in FIR No.2 dated 11.01.2023 (PS State Special Operation Cell, SAS Nagar) under Sections 17, 18 & 20 UAP Act, 120-B IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act, arising from alleged Babbar Khalsa International-linked target-killing conspiracy. Mobile-phone data showing co-accused Amrit Bal's number saved in the appellant's phone under the name 'Canada' furnished sufficient prima facie evidence against bail on merits; custody of 03 years and 30 days did not justify bail either. Reliance was placed on UOI Rep. by Insp. of NIA v. Barakathullah, [2024] 5 S.C.R. 1011; 2024 INSC 452, regarding the Section 43(D)(5) UAPA bar where accusations are prima facie true. Bail rejection upheld; appeal dismissed; trial to be expedited; the Court's observations expressly not to be treated as an expression of opinion on merits nor adverted to by the trial Court.

¶1

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶2

�

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶5

JUDGEMENT	JUDGEMENT	OPERATIVE PART	UPLOADED ON
RESERVED ON	PRONOUNCED ON	PRONOUNCED OR FULL
24.02.2026	16.03.2026	FULL PRONOUNCED	16.03.2026

¶6

Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey

¶7

...Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab …Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR

¶11

Present: Mr. Mitul Singh Rana, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶12

Mr. Deepinder Singh, Senior Addl. Advocate General, Punjab with Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶15

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Sections
2	11.01.2023	State Special Operation Cell, SAS Nagar	120-B IPC, 25/54/59 of Arms Act and Sections 17, 18 & 20 of UAP Act
Criminal	Case number b	efore the Sessions Court	CIS No.4006-2023 CNR No.PBSA01-010602-2023
Date of D	ecision		29.01.2024

¶16

Aggrieved by the dismissal of regular bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 29.01.2024, the appellant had come before this Court by filing the present appeal, seeking bail in the FIR mentioned above.

¶17

As per the custody certificate dated 23.02.2026, the appellant has the following criminal antecedents: -

¶18

Sr.	FIR	Dated	Police Station	Sections
No.	No.
1.	102	13.06.2019	Sadar Jagraon	61/1/14 of Excise Act
2	43	11.03.2021	Mandi Gobindgarh	341, 323, 394, 473, 506, 411, 34 IPC
3.	52	15.03.2021	Mandi Gobindgarh	411 IPC

¶19

JYOTI 2026.03.16 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶20

�

¶21

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶22

The facts of the case are being taken from reply dated 07.07.2025 filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Investigation, State Special Operation Cell, SAS Nagar, which reads as follows:

¶23

“2. That, the Punjab Police registered a case FIR No.02 dated 11.01.2023 under Sections 17, 18, 20 of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act at State Special Operation Cell Mohali, on the basis of Secret Information Received by Shri Arun Mundan DSP State Special Operation Cell Mohali that Gangster Jagdeep Singh alias Jaggu Bhagwanpuria (appellant), Amritpal Singh alias Amrit Bal, Pargat Singh and Damanjot Singh are all now associated with Babbar Khalsa International Organisation and this organisation is being operated by Paramjit Singh alias Pamma resident of house no. 1263, Phase 3-B Mohali who is now residing in England and further associated with one organisation namely Sikhs For Justice (SFJ) which is banned by Government of India.

¶24

3. That, Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhagwanpuria along with one Pargat Singh used to provide them other persons and Arms ammunition for carrying out such Illegal activities and Amrit Bal and Daman Kahlon used to provide them financial help for carrying out such illegal activities.

¶25

4. The investigation of this case was conducted by the State Special Operation Cell, Mohali and during the investigation conducted by State Special Operation Cell, Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhagwanpuria was arrested in the present case after getting his production Warrants from Bathinda Jail. During interrogation he disclosed that he was earlier known to accused Yuvraj Singh and it came to surface that Yuvraj Singh S/o Dilbagh Singh R/o Cheema Karan Singh Amritsar presently residing at house No.7 Guru Arjan Dev Nagar Putlighar Amritsar and Nishan Singh S/o Swarn Singh Rio village Narla PS Khaira Taran Taarn are connected with Amrit Bal accused in this case and Amrit Bal has send ammunition to them to target and kill a Hindu Leader.

¶26

5. On the basis of this Yuvraj Singh and Nishan Singh were arrayed as accused in this case. They were arrested from Verka Chowk Mohali on 17.1.2023 and one pistol 32 bore and 4 live cartridges 32 bore were recovered from them. One motorcycle without registration number was also recovered from them. During investigation on 18.1.2023 accused Nishan Singh disclosed that accused Amrit Bal has introduced him to present appellant Jaspal Singh @ Honey S/o Hari Singh R/o village Uchha Bhadla Khanna, Ludhiana and his contact number is 70090xxxx. Thereafter he talked to Jaspal Singh who told him that he has stalked a

¶27

JYOTI 2026.03.16 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶28

�

¶29

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶30

Hindu leader in Khana and Amrit Bal has also sent him ammunition in this regard. thereafter present appellant Jaspal Singh @ Honey was nominated as an accused in this case and he was arrested on 19.1.2023. Accused Jaspal Singh during interrogation disclosed that he was introduced to Amrit Bal through accused Pargat Singh and on the asking of Amrit Bal he was stalked a Hindu leader in Khanna and Amrit Bal had also sent him a pistol to murder that Hindu leader which was later taken back by Amrit Bal through his unknown companion. That's why no recovery was affected from the present appellant Jaspal Singh @ Honey. Many cases have already been registered against accused Yuvraj Singh, who while interrogation disclosed that he was known to Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhagwanpuria and Jaggu Bhagwanpuria had introduced him to Amrit Bal. During interrogation accused Nishan Singh, Yuvraj Singh and Jaspal Singh disclosed that they had to murder Hindu leaders in Khana and Mohali and had to kill a comrade leader in Jalandhar. That Amrit Bal had sent money to them to this purpose. On 31.1.2023 accused Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhawangpuria was brought on production warrants from Bathinda Jail and he was arrested in this case.

¶31

xxx xxx xxx

¶32

7. It was during the investigation of this case that Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhagwanpuria suffered a disclosure statement that accused Yuvraj Singh was known to him and he had introduced Yuvraj Singh to Amrit Bal. That Amrit Bal, Darmanjot Singh and Pargat Singh was working with member of Babbar Khalsa International namely Paramjit Singh. Paramjit Singh gives them targets. Amrit Bal, Pargat and Darman through their companions are doing target killings in Punjab. That Paramjit Pamma had arranged negotiation between Paramjit Singh, Darman with I.S.I agents in Pakistan and through them they are sending arms and ammunition to Punjab through Rajasthan border.

¶33

8. That after completing the investigation final report under section 173 Cr.P.C filled before the competent court of law on 13-07-2023. Total 16 prosecution witnesses cited in the final report. The prosecution sanction U/S 45 of the UAP Act was granted by the Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of home affairs and justice and the same was submitted before the trail court by the way of supplementary Challan on 11.04.2025. Now the case is pending for charge and consideration on 08.07.2025.

¶34

JYOTI 2026.03.16 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶35

�

¶36

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶37

The appellant's counsel seeks bail on the ground that he has been in custody for sufficient time and it's a false case.

¶38

The counsel for the State opposes bail on the grounds that the appellant is associated with gangsters and he is not entitled to bail. The learned counsel for the State further submits that the gangster, Jagdeep Singh @ Jaggu Bhagwanpuria and other dreaded criminals, namely Amritpal Singh @ Amrit Bal, Pargat Singh, Damanjot Singh and Paramjit Singh @ Pamma, who were members of Babbar Khalsa International Organization, are behind this incident, as such, the appellant is not entitled to bail.

¶39

We have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the record, including the reply and its analysis, which would lead to the following outcome.

¶40

In this background, analyzing the arguments of the appellant to seek bail are meaningless. It would be appropriate to refer to para 6 of the reply, which reads as follows:

¶41

“6. During investigation from the mobile phone data recovery of accused it has been found that mobile number of accused Amrit Ball +15592xxxx saved in the mobile phone of accused Nishan Singh on the name of Amrit Bal and the same number is saved in the mobile phone of present appellant Jaspal Singh @Honey on the name of 'Canada', which showed that accused Nishan Singh, Amrit Bal and present appellant Jaspal Singh @ Honey well connected with each other.”

¶42

Given above, there is sufficient prima facie evidence against the appellant, as such, he is not entitled to bail on merits. Regarding custody, the appellant's custody in the present case, as per the custody certificate dated 23.02.2026 is 03 years and 30 days, and he is not entitled to bail even on the ground of custody.

¶43

In UOI Rep. by Insp. of NIA v. Barakathullah, [2024] 5 S.C.R. 1011; 2024 INSC 452, May 22, 2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds:

¶44

[2]. The Central Government in Ministry of Home Affairs, CTCR Division having received a credible information that the office bearers, members and cadres of Popular Front of India (PFI), an extremist Islamic organization have been spreading its extremist ideology across Tamil Nadu, by establishing State Headquarters at Purasaiwakkam, Chennai and also offices in various districts of Tamil Nadu and that through their frontal Organizations like Campus Front of India, National Women’s Front, Social Democratic Party of India etc., they conspire for committing terrorist acts, raise funds for committing terrorist activities and recruit members for furthering their extremist ideology, and that the frontal organizations and PFI were involved in the recruitment of members to various prescribed terrorist organizations, passed an order on

¶45

JYOTI 2026.03.16 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶46

�

¶47

CRA-D-377-2024 (O&M)

¶48

16th September 2022, in exercise of the powers conferred under subsection (5) of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NIA Act’), directing the National Investigation Agency to take up investigation of the said case. In view of the said order, an FIR being RC-42/2022/NIA/DLI came to be registered on 19.09.2022 against the present respondents and other members and office bearers of PFI for the offences under Section 120(b), 153(A), 153(AA) of IPC and Section 13,17,18,18(B), 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the “UAPA”).

¶49

[22]. In the instant case, we are satisfied from the chargesheet as also the other material/documents relied upon by the appellant that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against the respondents are prima facie true and that the mandate contained in the proviso to Section 43(D)(5) would be applicable for not releasing the respondents on bail. Having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the alleged offences, previous criminal history of the respondents as mentioned in the charge-sheet, the period of custody undergone by the respondents being hardly one and half years, the severity of punishment prescribed for the alleged offences and prima facie material collected during the course of investigation, the impugned order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. We are conscious of the legal position that we should be slow in interfering with the order when the bail has been granted by the High Court, however it is equally well settled that if such order of granting bail is found to be illegal and perverse, it must be set aside.

¶50

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

¶51

Given above, the order of rejection of bail calls for no interference and the same is upheld. Appeal is dismissed. However, the trial be expedited. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶52

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶53

(SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE

¶54

16.03.2026
Jyoti-II
Whether speaking/reasoned	YES
Whether reportable	NO

¶55

JYOTI 2026.03.16 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaspal Singh @ Hani @ Honey 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iqbal Ahmed Vs State of Haryana through Commissioner

Sumit Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs R.C. Powaria and Ors.

Chaman Lal Vs State of Haryana and Others

A One Enterprises Vs Punjab State Power Corpration Ltd. Anr.

Palvinder Singh @ Dimple Vs Central Bureau of Investigation