Ravinder Singh Alias Kaka v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 30.04.2026 Ravinder Singh @ Kaka ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. K. D. Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab.

***** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.162, dated 14.09.2024, under Section 25 of Arms Act (Section 111 BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Chheharta, District Police Commissionerate. 2.

Succinctly the facts of the case are that the police party while on patrolling on 14.09.2024, received a secret information to the effect that Ravinder Singh @ Kaka, i.e. the petitioner, who was having bad character, was involved in bringing illegal pistol and other weapons from other states and supplying the same further. It was informed that he was present at service lane near while colour kothi on the way from Ghanpur kale towards India Gate Bye pass, near Baba Jeevan Singh colony for supplying the pistols and arms and in case of raid, he could be apprehended along with the weapons. On receiving the secret information, the raiding party

-2was constituted and reached the place as disclosed in the secret information. They saw that one young boy was standing, who on seeing the police, got perplexed and tried to fled away from the spot. However, on suspicion, he was apprehended by the police party. On asking, he disclosed his name to be Ravinder Singh @ Kaka, i.e. the petitioner. He was suspected to be carrying the illegal weapons and thus, his search was conducted. On conducting his search, .32 bore pistol along with magazine from the left side waist of his pant was recovered. 04 live cartridges were also recovered from him. He failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and he was arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced.

On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar praying for the grant of bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 13.02.2026. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that admittedly the FIR has been registered on the basis of secret information. He has submitted that the recovery is totally planted upon the petitioner in a premeditated manner. He has submitted that the petitioner

-3has been roped in the present case on the basis of alleged secret information. He has submitted that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Ashish Kamaria @ Bholu has already been released on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar after one month of his custody vide order dated 04.10.2024. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars from last about 11⁄2 years, however, no witness has been examined till date. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4.

Status report dated 28.04.2026 by way of an affidavit of Kamaljit Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, West, Amritsar on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed by learned State counsel today in the Cour, which is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. 5.

Per contra, learned State counsel has also vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that there was specific secret information about the petitioner. He has submitted that on conducting the search, .32 bore pistol and 4 live cartridges have been recovered from the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner is involved in 03 other cases. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 10 prosecution witnesses, no witness has been examined so far.

6.

Heard.

7.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the present FIR has been registered on the basis of secret information. The petitioner was arrested on the spot on 14.09.2024. Investigation in the present case already stands complete and the charges

-4have been framed, however, till date, out of total 10 prosecution witnesses, no witness has been examined so far. Co-accused, namely, Ashish Kumaria @ Bholu has already been granted the concession of bail by the learned trial Court. As submitted before this Court by learned counsel for the State that the petitioner is involved in 03 other cases, however, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is on bail in all those cases. 8.

The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

9.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 10.

However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counted in this case.

11.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the cases.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 30.04.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No