Rajesh Kumar Sharma Alias Jassi v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on: 01.10.2025
Pronounced on: 29.10.2025 Rajesh Kumar Sharma alias Jassi
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 03.09.2018 City Sangrur, 302, 34 IPC District Sangrur 1.
The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court under Section 439 CrPC, seeking regular bail. 2.
Per paragraph 9 of the bail petition, petitioner has clean antecedents. 3.
The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:
"2. That pursuant to the said order, it is submitted that the present case/FIR No. 242 dated 03.09.2018 u/s 302/34 IPC and 27/29/54/59 Arms Act P.S., City Sangrur was registered against Rajesh Kumar @ Jassi (present petitioner) son of Hem Raj Sharma r/o Mehal Mubarak Colony, Sangrur, Pardeep Kumar @ Kala son of Hem Raj, Anupam Kumar @ Pompy and Jaidev @ Jajju s/o Gulshan Kumar R/o Dashmesh Nagar, Sangrur on the statement of Karamjit Kumar @ Ravi S/o Rajinder Kumar R/o Quarter No. 137, Housing Board Colony, Sangrur to the effect that police received telephonic information on 2.9.2018 at about 11.15 p.m. to the effect that one man and a lady had been murdered on college road. Upon receipt of said information, the police party went to the spot where they came across Karamjeet Kumar, who disclosed that the dead-body lying there was of his brother Charanjeet and of his wife. The car
belonging to the deceased and empty cartridges were also found at the spot. Karamjeet Kumar disclosed that he is dealing in real estate and that his younger brother Charanjeet @ Chirhi was also into property business, who was to recover an amount of 5 lacs from Jassi and Pardeep Kumar Sharma in respect of which his brother (deceased) had spoken to him several times. Karamjeet Kumar further stated that on 02.09.2018 at about 10.58 P.M., his brother had called him from his mobile phone that Pardeep Kumar, Jassi sons of Hemraj, Anupam @ Pompy and Jaju had surrounded them near Ranbir College road and who were all armed with weapons and would kill them and asked the complainant to reach there immediately. The complainant stated that he, thereafter, went to the college road where he saw the dead bodies of his brother and of his wife lying in a pool of blood and that he fully believes that his brother and sister-in-law had been killed by Jassi and Pardeep Kumar Sharma alongwith Anupam @ Pompy, M.C. Councillor and Jaju son of Gulshan Kumar."
4.
The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. Counsel further submits that the petitioner would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the petitioner 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 may do so at their discretion, to which the petitioner shall have no objection. 5.
The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to following portion of the reply, which read as follows:
"THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER Rajesh Kumar Sharma (present petitioner) alongwith his other co-accused had committed the murder of Charanjit Chirri and his wife Pooja on 02.09.2018 by firing gun shots of 12 bore DBBL gun. Two empty cartridge 12 bore marka 65 MM were recovered from the spot. During investigation, the 12 bore DBBL gun No. 12429-A/2, Y-2011 used in the crime alongwith 2 empty cartridges and 8 live cartridges were recovered in this case from the possession of complainant. The said 12 bore gun alongwith 4 empty cartridges and small pallets were sent for analysis to FSL and as per examination report of FSL Punjab, two 12 bore 'KF special' cartridges cases had been fired through left barrel of 12 bore DBBL gun, two 12 bore 'KF special' cartridges cases had been fired through right barrel of 12
bore DBBL gun. The small pallets are of 12 bore cartridges and 12 bore DBBL. gun is in working condition.
ii) One car bearing No. PB 13AK 4300 used in the crime by accused/petitioner was recovered from him.
That as per PMR No. VKG/SNG/03/2018 and VKG/SNG/04/2018 (respectively) of deceased Charanjit @ Chirri and Pooja, the cause of death of both the deceased was reported by the Doctor as, "The cause of death in this case in our opinion is due to Hemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries sustained to major vital organs..
Head/brain/face/chest/lungs.. as result of firearm injuries." iv) From the statements of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C, it is evidence that petitioner/accused in connivance with his co-accused have committed the murder of Charanjit @ Chirri and his wife Pooja. THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Jassi (present petitioner) alongwith his coaccused namely Anupam Kumar alias Pompy, Pardeep Sharma alias Kala and Jaidev @ Jajju committed murder of Charanjeet @ Chirri and his wife Pooja on 02.09.2018 at about 11 PM near street no. 4 Sardar Basti, College Road, Sangrur, when Charanjeet @ Chirri alongwith his wife Pooja had gone to Ranbir college road, Sangrur by his car. So, the petitioner has played active role in committing the murder of two human being.
REASONING:
6.
Petitioner's first ground of bail is pre-trial Custody of more than 7 years. To this, counsel for the State submits that delay cannot be attributed to the State and they undertake not to seek any adjournment and they would have no objection if trial is expedited and it is a case of double murder and petitioner cannot be granted bail and trial is at fag end i.e. for defence evidence and arguments and now the ball is in the court of petitioner and co-accused.
7.
A perusal of the bail petition points out that earlier the petitioner had seven times filed the bail petitions, which were dismissed on merits and there were no change in circumstances except delay in trial. However, State has given assurance of not seeking any unnecessary adjournment, there is no reason for this Court to take a view different from the earlier Coordinate Bench which had rejected the bail on merits. Moreover, his case is at the stage of defence evidence and arguments. 8.
The petitioner's custody of around 07 years & 20 days, as per the custody certificate dated 30.09.2025, cannot be termed prolonged, given the minimum sentence prescribed for the offense, which is life imprisonment.
9.
Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 10.
Petition dismissed. Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial on top most priority on day to day basis. All pending applications, if any, are disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 29.10.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:
No.