IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-70797-2025 Date of decision: 11.02.2026 Gurpreet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present : Mr. R.S. Sangha, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, DAG, Punjab.

*****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)

1. Petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.246 dated 21.09.2025 registered against him at Police Station Sohana, District SAS Nagar (Mohali), for the commission of offences punishable u/s 304(2), 127(1) of BNS, has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail.

2. Relevant facts as emerging from the documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:-

Ajit Singh, son of Tara Singh, r/o House No.969, Phase 1 Mohali, set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint pointing therein that he is engaged in a private job. On 21.09.2025, he was going on his Activa scooter bearing registration No.PB-65-BC-9077 from Phase 11 to Industrial Area phase 8, Mohali. When he reached little ahead of Gurudwara Singh Shaheeda Sohana Sahib, he noticed that a Swift car was parked on the road side, next to which 3 boys were standing. He was halted by them and was questioned about the location of Punjab Agro. Since he was not aware about the exact location, he expressed his inability to help them. One of the boys then made him talk to some other person over phone, who disclosed that the office is in Sector-66.

Meanwhile, 2 young boys came on the motorcycle. At about 1:50 PM, all of them caught hold of him and despite his stiff resistance snatched the gold bracelet being worn by him. Before he could raise an alarm, 3 boys sped away in the swift car and 2 were in the process of speeding away on the motorcycle, when he was able to catch hold one of them, who disclosed his identification details as Manpreet Singh, son of Balraj Singh, r/o Village Rouli PS Mehna and also pointed out the names and address of his other accomplices.

Petitioner was named by co-accused Manpreet Singh, who was caught at the site. With this backdrop, he requested the police officials to catch hold of all those, who were involved in the incident as also to initiate appropriate proceedings against them.

On the basis of the said complaint, a formal case vide FIR No.246 dated 21.09.2025 u/s 304(2) and 127(1) of BNS, was registered against present petitioner and others. Proceedings were set into motion.

3. Apprehending his arrest, petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar. The same was dismissed vide order dated 28.11.2025. Aggrieved of which, the present petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner, who was not named in the FIR, has been falsely implicated in the present case. It was only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Manpreet Singh that his name cropped up. The said disclosure statement in the absence of recovery of any other incriminating material is not admissible in evidence. It is further the submission of learned counsel that complainant was not known the present petitioner personally neither the identification details of the accused were mentioned in the complaint, thus purely on unverified disclosure statement of co-accused Manpreet Singh, with whom petitioner has prior enmity, he (P) has been unnecessarily dragged in.

The next leg of submission raised by learned counsel is that the custodial interrogation of petitioner is not needed as nothing is to be recovered from him, for gold Kara of complainant has already been recovered from co-accused Manpreet Singh, who was arrested at the spot. Nonetheless, being a law-abiding citizen, petitioner is willing to join the investigation as and when called for by the IO. Primarily on these grounds, it was prayed that concession of pre-arrest bail be granted to the petitioner.

5. Per contra, while opposing the request for grant of anticipatory bail, learned State counsel contends that petitio