IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH JUDGEMENT JUDGEMENT OPERATIVE PART UPLOADED ON RESERVED ON PRONOUNCED PRONOUNCED OR ON FULL

25.02.2026 10.03.2026 FULL PRONOUNCED 11.03.2026 Sukhmandar Singh ...Appellant Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present: Mr. R.S. Bains, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sarabjot S. Cheema, Advocate for the appellant(s).

Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, D.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu, Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent-NIA.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

AND RC No. Dated Police Station Section

19/2020/ 05.04.2020 National 124A, 120-B IPC and 13, 16, 17, NIA/DLI Investigation Agency 18, 20 of the UAPA Act Bail Application number before the Sessions CIS No. BA/2678/2024 Court CNR No. PBSA01006534-2024 Date of Decision 03.10.2024

1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of regular bail by the Special Judge, NIA, Punjab vide order dated 03.10.2024, the appellant had come up before this Court by filing the present appeal under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008.

2. In paragraph 17 of the appeal, the appellant declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. The appellant’s counsel submits that the appellant would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the appellant repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State may file an application to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and to which the appellant shall have no objection. Counsel for the appellant further submits that he shall not use his right of speech and expression beyond what is permitted under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

4. The State’s counsel opposes the bail.

5. Facts of the case are being taken from the reply dated March 07, 2025, filed by the Special Public Prosecutor of the National Investigative Agency in the present appeal.

6. The allegations against the appellant are of propagating the secessionist movement of the Khalistan Referendum 2020. There were allegations of pasting posters and banners containing the words "Khalistan Zindabad" and "Khalistan Referendum 2020". In addition to that, there were allegations of conspiracy to procure weapons, including arson, efforts for arms training in Pakistan, and acts of violence in Punjab and various parts of India.

7. On October 19, 2018, Amritsar police apprehended Sukhraj Singh alias Raju (A-1) and Malkeet Singh alias Meetu (A-2) on the spot, i.e., Kot Mit Singh flyover, while they were hanging ‘Khalistan Zindabad’ and ‘Khalistan Referendum 2020’ banners on the pillars of the flyover. Based on such conduct, the FIR was registered in Police Station Sultanwind, Amritsar (City). The investigation led to the arrest of Bikramjit Singh alias Vicky (A-3), Manjeet Singh alias Manjit Singh alias Manga (A-4), Jatinder Singh alias Goldy (A-5), Gurwinder Singh alias Gurpreet Gopi (A-6), Harpreet Singh alias Happy (A- 7), Harmeet Singh alias Raju (A-8), Roofel @ Rufal @ Rahul Gill (A-9), Sukhmander Singh @ Gopi (A-10) (Appellant) and Kuldeep Singh @ Kuldip Singh @ Keepa (A-11). After that, the matter was transferred to the National Investigation Agency, and Pargat Singh (A-13) was also arrested by the NIA.

8. The case of the NIA is about receiving funds from outside India, sent by members of ‘Sikhs for Justice’, and they were to be used for furthering terror activities and other preparatory acts, i.e., attempts to procure weapons for terror activities in India and to get arms training in Pakistan. The accused A-1 to A-13 were members of a terrorist gang formed by the notified terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun (A-12) for the propagation of the Secessionist Movement “Punjab Referendum 2020,” and it was by a banned organization “Sikhs for Justice” (SJF