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

02.02.2026 09.03.2026 FULL PRONOUNCED 09.03.2026 Karandeep Singh @ Karan ...Appellant Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present: Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Akshay Kumar, A.A.G., Punjab.

.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Section
12	04.02.2025	Sadar, Amritsar	3, 4, 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 13, 16, 18, 20 of UAPA Act, 25(6), (7), (8), 54/59 of Arms Act and 253, 61(2), 238, 317(2), 341(2) BNS

Criminal Case number before the Sessions Court BA/6363/2025 CNR No. PBAS010157192025 Date of Decision 12.08.2025

1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of regular bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 12.08.2025, the appellant had come before this Court by filing the present appeal, seeking bail in the FIR captioned above.

2. Per the custody certificate dated 01.02.2026, the appellant has the following criminal antecedents: -

Sr. No. FIR Dated Police Station Sections

1. 4 10.02.2025 Airport 25, 54, 59 of Arms At and 109, 132, 221, 262, 62 BNS

3. Counsel for the appellant seeks bail on the following grounds:

(i) In addition to recovery of motorcycle and mobile, nothing nothing else was recovered from him.

(ii) Appellant is in custody from February 08, 2025.

(iii) No loss was caused to property or person.

(iv) Appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated.

(v) He is not involved in any other case.

4. State counsel opposed the bail on the grounds that the intent of the appellant was to cause massive destruction to life and property and it was a sheer luck that the loss was not caused, but given the attempt and intention of the appellant to create disturbances to affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the appellant is not entitled for bail.

5. An analysis of the arguments and the contents of the appeal as well as the short reply would lead to the following outcome.

6. On February 04, 2025, the FIR was registered when an explosion had taken place near an old abundant building of Police Post Fatehgarh Churian Road in Amritsar City. The reason for explosion was some explosive substance and not any natural incident. On receiving the news and information about the explosion, the above captioned FIR was registered. Forensic team was sent to the spot along with dog squad who conducted forensic examination and other evidence and even videography was done.

7. The role and evidence against the appellant is mentioned in the short reply which reads as follows:

“Role of the petitioner

5. That on 08.02.2025, the petitioner and co-accused Lovepreet Singh alias Labha were identified as prime suspects on the basis of the analysis of the mobile tower dump, CCTV camera recordings near the place of occurrence and other different places of the city and information from the secret informers. They were nominated as accused in the case and arrested near the village Mallunangal, District Amritsar during the checking while riding motorcycle No. PB02-EN-1021. During their custodial interrogation, co-accused Lovepreet Singh alias Labha suffered a disclosure statement dated 09.02.2025 disclosing therein that Buta Singh alias Joban son of Satnam Singh resident of village Mukam, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar was his friend and he came into contact with co-accused Harpreet Singh alias Happy Pashian through aforesaid Buta Singh alias Joban and they (Harpreet Singh alias Happy Pashian and Buta Singh alias Joban) induced him to throw a grenade on the building of the Police post situated at Fatehgarh Churrian road on the payment of Rs. 07 lakh to him. He further disclosed that on 03.02.2025 he along with his friend Karandeep Singh alias Karan (petitioner) threw a grenade on the building of the Police post situated at Fatehgarh Churrian road and received Rs. 50 thousand from co-accused Har

Click Here to Read the rest of this document