SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1837

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ.
Dheeraj Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRA-D-1347-2025
Decided On : 01-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Vipan Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, D.A.G.

JUDGMENT :

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.DatedPolice StationSection
5716.03.2025Maqsudan, Jalandhar109 BNS, 3, 4, 5 of Explosive Substance Act

Criminal Case number before the Sessions Court BA-5415-2025
Date of Decision19.07.2025

1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of regular bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 19.07.2025, the appellant had come before this Court by filing the present appeal, seeking bail in the FIR mentioned above.

2. Per custody certificate, the appellant has the following criminal antecedent:

Sr. No.FIR No.DatedOffencesPolice Station
15918.03.2025109, 221, 132, 261, 62 BNS and 25 of Arms ActMaqsudan

3. The case set up by NIA is that on the intervening night of March 15/16, 2025 one accused Amritpreet Singh took Hardik Kamboj outside the house of the complainant Navdeep Singh @ Roger Sandhu where he lodged the hand grenade towards the balcony of the residential house, however, the hand grenade did not explode.

4. Counsel for the appellant seeks bail on the ground that the appellant has been arraigned as an accused based on the disclosure statement of co-accused.

5. State counsel opposes the bail on the grounds that the appellant along with co- accused collected a polybag containing three pistols and five magazines from Rahul Basra and he along with co-accused Amritpreet Singh delivered the hand grenade and pistol to Hardik Kamboj and in the opinion of the State, it is not a case where bail should be granted.

6. An analysis of the above arguments would lead to the following outcome.

7. It shall be appropriate to refer to the facts of the case from the reply filed by State counsel which reads as follows:

“3. That it is respectfully submitted that in compliance to the Order dated 13.11.2025 passed by this Hon'ble High Court, the deponent has discussed the matter with the SHO of Police Station Maqsudan and perused the record. The factual matrix of the case is that on 5.03.2025 complainant Sh. Navdeep Singh @ Roger Sandhu son of Gurdeep Singh, resident of village Raipur Rasulpur, Police Station Maqsudan, District Jalandhar (Rural) made a statement to S.I. Balbir Singh, SHO, PS: Maqsudan on allegations that he is engaged as a YouTube Blogger and has established an online identity under the name "Roger Sandhu." He has set up a recording studio within his residential premises. He further stated that he produces and broadcasts content on YouTube.com, including roasting. He is currently residing in the village Raipur Rasulpur, which is the native village of his in-laws. He has been living there for the past 3-4 years and has constructed his own residential house. On the intervening night of 15/16.03.2025, he retired to bed after taking his evening meal. The following morning, upon proceeding to the balcony as per his usual routine, he observed a rounded metallic object lying therein. Feeling threatened by its unexplained presence, he immediately contacted Police Station Maqsudan to report the incident. He has alleged that the aforementioned act was committed by one Shahzad Bhatti, who maintains a social media account under the name "Shehzad Bhatti." It is stated that Shahzad Bhatti had previously approached him with a proposal to participate in a live-streamed match, with the intent of increasing viewer engagement and receiving digital gifts. Upon his refusal to participate, Shahzad Bhatti purportedly began engaging in acts of digital extortion. Subsequently, Shahzad Bhatti allegedly initiated a campaign of false accusations against him and his associates, including claims of propagating content offensive to Islam. It is further alleged that Shahzad Bhatti issued threats to his life and that of his family. He has specifically named Shahzad Bhatti as the individual responsible for placing or throwing the aforementioned rounded metallic object at his residence, with the intent to intimidate and cause fear to him and his family members. On the basis of above information, an FIR was lodged at PS: Maqsudan, for offences under S

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top