IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

225 Date of decision: 20.02.2026 Harpreet Singh @ Happy ...........Petitioner versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Gupreet Singh Gurna, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Swapan Shorey, D.A.G., Punjab.

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case FIR No.99 dated 25.06.2025 registered under Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar Rural.

2. As per case of the prosecution, the petitioner along with co-accused, namely Kamalpreet Singh, was apprehended on 25.05.2025. From the possession of the petitioner, one country made pistol along with one live cartridge 315 bore was recovered and from co-accused Kamalpreet Singh, one country made pistol was recovered. Both of them could not produce any valid license for the same. Hence, the present FIR has been registered against the petitioner and two other persons.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The recovery in the case had already been effected and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. He further submits that co-accused Kamalpreet Singh and Mandeep Singh have already been granted concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 29.09.2025 passed in CRM-M-46510-2025 and order dated 27.11.2025 passed in CRM-M-50417-2025, respectively (Annexures P- 2 & P-3). He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2025. The trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude and therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner behind the bars.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. He has produced custody certificate dated 19.02.2026 which is taken on record. As per which the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 07 months and he is also involved in one another case i.e. FIR No.04 dated 29.03.2023 registered under Sections 109 & 151 of IPC at Police Station Chherretta. 5. In response thereto, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is on bail in the said case and mere pendency of the other case, the petitioner cannot be denied the concession of regular bail in the instant case. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (2) SCC 382. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc.”

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

7. Keeping in view the custody of the petitioner which is 07 months and 22 days and the facts that the alleged recovery in this case had already been effected and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner; challan in this case has already been presented and charges have already been framed; out of total 10 prosecution witnesses only 01 has been partly examined so far; other two co-accused including Kamalpreet Singh from whom recovery was effected, have already been granted concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and the trial may take a considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the opinion that a case is made out for grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage.

8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is order