IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 02.02.2026 Pronounced on: 03.02.2026 Uploaded on: 03.02.2026 Gurcharan Singh …Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Manuj Nagrath, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab.

None for respondent No.2.

****

SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, J.

1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.157 dated 25.06.2025 under Sections 64 BNS, Section 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sidhwan Bet, Ludhiana. Offences under Section 64 BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act have been deleted and charges have been framed under Section 74 BNS and Section 10 POCSO Act, in alternative, under Section 76 BNS.

2. Brief facts of the case are that mother of the victim stated that her younger daughter ‘P’ was 10 years old, a student of Class V in the Government School. The day before, on 24.06.2025, ‘P’ went to Gurudwara Sahib near their house along with other children to pay obeisance and returned home at 6/6:30 PM. She looked scared, nervous and frightened. She neither ate dinner nor spoke to anyone. When she made inquiry, she shared that when she went to Gurdwara Sahib, Baba (Pathi Sahib) asked her to sweep and spread the Dari inside the Gurdwara. Baba stopped other children outside the Gurdwara and told her to clean his living room saying that he would give her Ladoos to eat. Thereafter, the Baba took her to his residence, where he made her sit on the bed. After he closed the door, he asked her to close her eyes and gave her ladoo to eat. Baba Ji then took off all his clothes, removed her trouser, put his hand on her private part and started doing wrong acts. She was afraid and ran home through the other door. She spoke to her husband. The name of Baba was Gurcharan Singh.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the FIR was registered under Section 67 BNS and Section 6 POCSO, learned Trial Court had diluted the charges and framed charge sheet under Section 74, 76 BNS and Section 10 of POCSO Act. He further submits that petitioner was 60 years old and the CCTV footage installed inside the Gurdwara did not contain any evidence regarding the alleged sexual assault. The petitioner could be seen going inside a room in the Gurdwara but came out soon thereafter. He had been falsely implicated in the case on account of a dispute regarding control of Managing Committee of the Gurdwara. Complainant maintained close relationship with the opposition and had fabricated charges against the petitioner with the intent to malign him and damage his position. No medical examination of the prosecutrix was done and the case was maliciously instituted to tarnish the reputation of the petitioner. He further submits that prosecutrix, complainant and doctor had already been examined during the trial and petitioner was in custody w.e.f. 25.06.2025.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail on the ground of tender age of the victim child, age of the petitioner and his position.

5. Petitioner is 66 years of age, Pathi of Gurdwara Sahib. He is alleged to have sexually assaulted a minor girl child aged 9 years. Considering the nature and substance of allegations against the petitioner, the prima facie material against him, his position, standing and his age, it is not a fit case to enlarge him on regular bail.

6. The petition is dismissed.

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL)

Reserved on: 02.02.2026 JUDGE Pronounced on: 03.02.2026 Kapil