Allowed

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jul 2026CRM-M/10566/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second regular bail petition in a non-injury FIR under BNS and Arms Act sections arising from an old family/civil dispute. Court noted custody exceeding one year and no witness examined, held further custody purposeless, and granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail pending trial on furnishing bail bonds and surety, subject to stated conditions.

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi Vs State of Punjab — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

203

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-10566-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:17.07.2026

¶4

Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi …Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Punjab …Respondent

¶7

Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat

¶8

Present : Mr. R.P Dhir, Advocate

¶9

. Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill,Sr. DAG, Punjab.

¶11

Mr. S.K Kanojia, Advocate for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

¶14

CRM-12968-2026

¶15

Application is allowed as prayed for, subject to just all

¶16

exceptions.

¶17

Annexure P-1 is taken on record.

¶18

Main case

¶19

The petitioner has filed the second petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.59, dated 29.05.2025 registered under Sections 109,49 351(2) of B.N.S {Sections 307,109,503 of IPC} Sections 25/27/54/59 of Arms Act added later on, at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1).

¶20

HITESH 2026.07.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

¶21

-2

¶22

CRM-M-10566-2026 (O&M)

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the present case the FIR has been got registered by Sukhwant Singh, who is the real uncle of the present petitioner. Even, the FIR has been got registered by him due to some old dispute. He further submits that it is a case of non-injury and the offence under Section 109 of B.N.S has been wrongly added in the present case. Apart from that, in fact, the complainant party was the real aggressor in the present case and they had also attacked to the petitioner. In his self-defence, the petitioner had fired from his licensed gun and no offence is made out against him. He further submits that similar other FIRs have been registered against the complainant in the present case and he is a hardened criminal. Further, even a civil dispute is pending between the parties regarding a piece of land and the petitioner has been falsely involved. Learned counsel further submits that even though four other cases of similar nature has been registered against the petitioner, but he has been acquitted in all cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he was arrested in the present case on 13.07.2025 and no witness has been examined so far.

¶24

On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that in the past also, he was involved in four other cases and the petition deserves to be dismissed by this Court.

¶25

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

¶26

It is not in dispute that in the present case, no person had suffered an injury and the petitioner is continuously in custody for the last more than one

¶27

HITESH 2026.07.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

¶28

CRM-M-10566-2026 (O&M)

¶29

-3

¶30

year. Even, no witness has been examined so far and the conclusion of trial may take quite a long time. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose.

¶31

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

(i) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority.

¶33

(ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case.

¶34

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶35

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case he is not holder of the same, he shall swear an affidavit to that effect.

¶36

(v) The petitioner shall also file his affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning his ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by him during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned Trial Court.

¶37

(vi) In case, the petitioner is involved in any other criminal activity, during the pendency of the trial, it shall be viewed seriously.

¶38

(vii) The concerned Court may insist on two heavy local sureties

¶39

HITESH 2026.07.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

¶40

CRM-M-10566-2026 (O&M)

¶41

-4

¶42

and may also impose any other condition, in accordance with law, while accepting the bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner.

¶43

7. In case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions mentioned above, it shall be viewed seriously and the concession of bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application in this regard.

¶44

17.07.2026		(N.S.SHEKHAWAT) JUDGE
hitesh
	Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable	: Yes/No : Yes/No

¶45

HITESH 2026.07.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sorath Vs State of Haryana

Aditya @ Tota Vs State of Punjab

Shalender Singh Vs State of Haryana

Balwinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Harbans Lal Singla Vs Hdfc Bank

Amanpreet Vs State of Punjab and Another