Court Grants Bail in Arms Act Case Based on Parity: Punjab and Haryana High Court

In a significant order concerning the principle of parity in criminal litigation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to Navpreet Singh, who was accused in a high-stakes car-snatching case involving firearms and police confrontation.

The Case Background: A High-Speed Pursuit

The case stems from FIR No. 209, registered at Police Station Belongi, District SAS Nagar, under various provisions including Sections 186, 353, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), alongside the Arms Act.

The incident originated from a distress call regarding a car-snatching at gunpoint in Amritsar. A police party intercepted the vehicle at a checkpoint near G.T. Road, leading to a high-speed chase where the occupants reportedly fired at the police. Following a skirmish, the suspects abandoned the vehicle and fled. The petitioner, Navpreet Singh, was arrested on July 2, 2025—months after the initial incident—based on a disclosure statement provided by a co-accused, Rajanpreet Singh.

Arguments for and Against

The petitioner’s counsel argued that Navpreet Singh had been falsely implicated, noting that he was not named in the original FIR and that no test identification parade was conducted. Crucially, the defense highlighted that a co-accused, Rajanpreet Singh, had already been granted regular bail by a coordinate bench in April 2024. The defense maintained that the petitioner’s case was identical to that of his co-accused, and in light of the completion of the investigation and the filing of the final report, prolonged incarceration was unwarranted.

The State counsel, representing the prosecution, opposed the plea, citing the gravity of the offences and the danger posed to public safety during the incident.

Key Observations

Justice Yashivir Singh Rathor noted the lack of recovery from the petitioner and the consistency of the evidence when compared to co-accused who are already on personal liberty.

> "Offence in question was committed by unknown persons and no recovery has been affected from any of the accused including the petitioner, who has been nominated as an accused by one Rajanpreet Singh."

The Court further observed:

> "Co-accused Rajanpreet Singh has already been released on bail... The petitioner is in custody since 02.07.2025. Challan has already been presented and trial will thus take a long time to conclude."

The Verdict: Embracing Parity

Recognizing that the investigation had concluded and emphasizing that the trial was unlikely to conclude in the immediate future, the Court allowed the petition.

"Having regard to the aforesaid factual position, but without commenting anything upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court concerned, on usual terms and conditions," concluded Justice Rathor.

This ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to the principle of parity, ensuring that co-accused persons similarly situated are subject to the same standards of judicial discretion, provided the requirements for trial integrity are met.