IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
Davender Singh Alias Davinder Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M-56269 of 2025 (O&M)
Decided On : 01-04-2026
JUDGMENT :
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
CRM-13802-2026 Allowed, as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions.
Main case
1. The instant first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 31 dated 15.05.2025, registered under Section(s) 152, 238(B) of BNS, 2023 and Section 5 of Official Secret Information Act, 2023 at Police Station Cyber Crime Kaithal, District Kaithal.
2. The present First Information Report has been registered on the statement of Sub-Inspector Sumit Kumar of the Special Detective Unit. The FIR emanates from the disclosure statement of the petitioner-Davender Singh, in FIR No. 108 dated 11.05.2025 registered under the Arms Act for having uploaded his own photographs with pistols and gun on Facebook. It is stated in the complaint that on 15.05.2025, the police party interrogated the aforesaid accused, Davender Singh, who, during the course of interrogation, suffered a disclosure statement admitting his connections with certain persons based in Pakistan. He disclosed that, in November 2024, he had travelled to Pakistan on a religious trip, where he came into contact with some persons who identified themselves as Shah Ji, Rasid Mohammad, Arslan and a female named Riza. It is averred that these persons facilitated his stay and other arrangements and were associated with espionage activities. The accused is further stated to have disclosed that, upon his return to India, he remained in contact with the aforesaid persons through social media platforms, including WhatsApp and Snapchat, and, at the instance of one Shah Ji, transferred a sum of Rs.1,500/- to a person connected with them. It is alleged in the complaint that the said individuals were associated with Pakistan’s intelligence agencies and that the accused had been recording the movements of the Indian Army and collecting other confidential information, which he transmitted to the aforesaid persons through electronic means. It is further alleged that the accused had shared sensitive information, including details relating to Army establishments at Patiala and had also attempted, at the behest of the said foreign contacts, to involve other persons in such activities. The disclosure statement further indicates that communications were exchanged through specified WhatsApp numbers and Snapchat accounts linked to the aforesaid individuals. The accused is also stated to have admitted that, apprehending his arrest, he deleted certain data from his mobile phone so as to destroy evidence of his communications with the said persons, though certain original photographs remained stored on his social media accounts. He is alleged to have also admitted that the information shared by him posed a serious threat to the sovereignty, integrity, unity and security of the country. The said disclosure statement was recorded and signed by the accused as well as by the attesting witnesses, namely EASI Ajeet Singh and Head Constable Rajbir Singh. On the basis of the aforesaid disclosure and the material emerging therefrom, it was found that a cognizable offence was made out for offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923. Accordingly, the information was forwarded to Police Station Cyber Crime, Kaithal, whereupon the present FIR came to be registered.
3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that one FIR No. 108 dated 11.05.2025 had earlier been registered against the petitioner for offence under Section 25(1-AAA), 25 (1-B) (a) and 29 (B) of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Guhla, on the basis of secret information alleging that the petitioner had uploaded his photographs with a pistol and a gun on his Facebook account. It is submitted that the petitioner had been taken in custody in connection with the said case notwithstanding the fact that the said photographs had been uploaded as far back as in th
Bail for offences under the Official Secrets Act is not granted lightly when serious allegations of espionage and substantial evidence exist against the accused.
Cognizance under the Official Secrets Act requires approval from the appropriate government, and failure to obtain such approval renders the charges without authority of law.
UA(P) Act - Grant or release on bail to an accused person, is enunciated as a non-obstante clause, which clearly and unequivocally postulates that, if the Court is of the opinion that, there are reas....
Amendment in Section 45 by the Finance Act 2018 is only with respect to substituting the term ‘offence punishable for 3 years’ with ‘offence under this Act.
Bail may be granted if the accused is named in a co-accused's disclosure statement without corroborative evidence, especially after substantial custody time, aligning with the right to a speedy trial....
The court established that the absence of incriminating evidence and prolonged detention without trial are critical factors in granting bail.
A journalist's bail was granted based on jurisdictional grounds, and no substantial evidence of tampering was found, despite allegations under the Official Secrets Act and PMLA.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.