State Of Punjab v. Jobanpreet Singh Alias Joban
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on : 18.11.2025 Pronounced on : 27.11.2025 1.
CRA-D-616 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant versus Jobanpreet Singh @ Joban .....Respondent 2.
CRA-D-617 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant versus Kuldeep Singh @ Landu .....Respondent 3.
CRA-D-623 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant versus Gurlal Singh @ Galla .....Respondent 4.
CRA-D-624 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant
Versus
Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Numberdar .....Respondent 5.
CRA-D-625 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant versus Surlalpal Singh @ Gurlal Singh @ Lalhi .....Respondent 6.
CRA-D-626 of 2024 State of Punjab .....Appellant versus Gursewak Singh @ Khali .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI Present :
Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant in CRA-D-623 of 2024.
Mr. Siddharth Attri, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 2 **** RAMESH KUMARI, J.
CRM No. 17600-2024 in CRA-D-616-2024 CRM No. 17604-2024 in CRA-D-617-2024 CRM No. 17703-2024 in CRA-D-623-2024 CRM No. 17705-2024 in CRA-D-624-2024 CRM No. 17706-2024 in CRA-D-625-2024 CRM No. 17710-2024 in CRA-D-626-2024 (All applications for condonation of delay in filing appeals). Appellant-State of Punjab has filed these applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 230 days in CRAD-616-2024; 207 days each in CRA-D-617-2024 and CRA-D-623-2024; 215 days in CRA-D-624 of 2024; 206 days in CRA-D-625 of 2024 and 219 days in CRA-D-626-2024, respectively in filing the appeals against the impugned orders dated 22.05.2023; 17.05.2023; 07.06.2023 and 05.05.2023 respectively passed by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. 2.
In CRA-D-616 of 2024, the delay application has been filed on the ground that the certified copy of the impugned order dated 22.05.2023 was applied on 17.05.2023 and same was prepared on 13.07.2023 and delivered on 04.08.2023 and thereafter the Additional District Attorney, Tarn Taran sent the proposal to the Director, Prosecution & Litigation, Punjab for filing the appeal against the impugned judgment. The Director, Prosecution & Litigation, Punjab examined the proposal and sent the same to Department of Home Affairs & Justice on 28.07.2023 and thereafter the same proposal was sent to the office of Advocate General, Punjab for legal opinion which was received in the office of Advocate General, Punjab on 17.08.2023. On 21.08.2023, office of Advocate General, Punjab opined that the matter is fit for filing appeal against the impugned order dated 22.05.2023. Department of Justice (Judicial Branch-II), Punjab also agreed with the opinion of the Advocate
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 3 General, Punjab and issued sanction for filing the appeal vide memo dated 12.09.2023 and the said sanction received in the office of Advocate General, Punjab on 14.09.2023. Thereafter office of Advocate General, Punjab directed the Police Department, District Tarn Taran for drafting the grounds of appeal and thereafter the file was received from the Police Department after preparing of grounds of appeal and affidavit on 15.12.2023. 3.
Similar grounds for condonation of delay have also been taken in other appeals by the appellant-State of Punjab. 4.
As per the applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed separately in all the six appeals, the relevant dates are as under:- ()*++ ,+,-% *(* ,+,- ,,'+.',/ ()'+.',/ (/'+)',/ +-'+0',/ (1'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ()'+0',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (,'+1',/ (-'+1',/ ()),/ ,+,-% *,/ ,+,- ()'+.',/ +.'+)',/ (/'+)',/ +-'+0',/ (1'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ()'+0',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (.'+1',/ (0'+1',/ ()*+- ,+,-% *() ,+,- ()'+.',/ +.'+)',/ (/'+)',/ (/'+)',/ (1'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ (('+0',/ (*'+0',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (-'+1',/ (.'+1',/ ())+. ,+,-% *,- ,+,- +)'+*',/ +.'+)',/ (/'+)',/ +-'+0',/ ,0'+)',/ ,('+0',/ ,0'+)',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (,'+1',/ (-'+1',/ (1'+)',/ ())(+ ,+,-% *,* ,+,- +.'+.',/ +.'+)',/ (/'+)',/ +-'+0',/ (1'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ()'+0',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (.'+1',/ (0'+1',/ ())+* ,+,-% *,. ,+,- +)'+*',/ +.'+)',/ (/'+)',/ +-'+0',/ (1'+)',/ ,0'+)',/ ,0''+)',/ ()'+0',/ ,('+0',/2 ,/'+0',/ (,'+1',/ (-'+1',/
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 4 Thereafter, the sanction received in each case in the office of Advocate General, Punjab was sent to Police Department, District Tarn Taran for drafting of appeal and application for condonation of delay, if any and affidavits.
5. It is submitted by learned State counsel appearing for the appellant-State of Punjab that delay in filing the appeals has occurred due to lengthy departmental procedure and obtaining sanction to file the appeals which is neither intentional nor willful.
6.
All the abovesaid bail orders were passed by the Court of the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran in case FIR No. 187 dated 10.12.2022 under Sections 307, 120-B, 427, 216, 489, 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code; under Section 16 of the Unlawful activities (Prevention) Act; 3 of the Explosive Act and Sections 25(6), 25(7), 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sarhali. The bail applications moved by respondent-accused were allowed by the then Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran on different dates in the presence of learned counsel for the accused (respondents herein) and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. There is no justification for delay in applying the certified copy on 05.07.2023 of orders which were passed on 17.05.2023, 07.06.2023, 05.05.2023 and 07.06.2023 respectively.
Similarly, copy of order dated 22.05.2023 could not have been applied on 17.05.2023 because the trial Court as on said date had not decided the bail application. The sanction to file appeals were obtained on dates ranging from 14.09.2023 to 18.09.2023 and Criminal Appeals coupled with Criminal Miscellaneous Applications are filed in March-2024.
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 5 of the Limitation Act have been filed on flimsy grounds. Accordingly, no ground for condonation of delay in filing the abovesaid appeals is made out. 7.
Even on merits, there is no case in favour of prosecution. FIR No. 187 dated 10.12.2022 for commission of offences under section 307 of IPC, 16 Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 1967 (Amendment 2012), Section 3 of The Explosive Substance Act 1908, section 16 Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 1967 (Amendment 2012) was registered at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran on the basis of the statement of ASI Bishan Lal, which is to the following effect:- "
!
" # ! $ #
%
&
"# $
# %
& '
%
(
(
& '
%
(
) * 8(a) DSP Satnam Singh of Sub-division Patti conducted investigation and the spot was inspected and one rocket launcher and one RPG 26 shell were taken into possession near the place of occurrence. The District Magistrate had deputed Shri Rakesh Kumar Garg, Tehsildar to visit the spot. Bomb disposal unit was also summoned at the spot. The team of bomb disposal inspected the RPG and on 11.12.2022 RPG was disposed of. The
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 6 shell of RPG 26 and part of it including parpalid was disposed. On 13.12.2022 offence under section 427, 120-B of IPC were also added. 8(b). On 15.12.2022 during the course of investigation, Gurlal Singh @ Gala son of Parmatama Singh, resident of Dhile Chohla Sahib was found in possession of 10 bullets of 32 bore and Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Lambardar son of Gurshan Singh, resident of Naushera Pannuan was found in conscious possession of one pistol of 32 bore along with five live cartridges and Gurpreet Singh and Gurlal Singh @ Gala were found in possession of motorcycle bearing PB47-B-5255 Bajaj CT 100. Jobanpreet Singh @ Joban son of Hardeep Singh was found in possession of 30 pistols of 30 bore along with 5 live cartridges of the same bore whereas learned counsel for the accused has clarified before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran that only one pistol of 30 bore was recovered. Surlal Pal @ Gurlal Singh Lalli son of Sukhwinder Singh was found in conscious possession of 30 live cartridge of 30 bore.
8(c) On 16.12.2022 during the course of investigation Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Numbardar son of Gursharan Singh @ Noni has made disclosure statement and one P-86 Hand grenade was recovered from his possession. Gurlal Singh @ Gala made a disclosure statement and got recovered Rs. 20000/- from his house.
8(d) On 16.12.2022, Juvenile D.S. got recovered the 10 live cartridges of .32 bore and juvenile P.S. alias R got recovered one pistol make 32 bore with five live cartridges. Accused Ajmer Singh son of Major Singh suffered disclosure statement that attack on P.S. Sarhali with RPG was got done through both juveniles D.S. and P.S. alias R and after that Satnam alias Satta son of Jaswant Singh, Ravinder Singh @ Nannu and Harmandeep Singh @
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 7 Mintu gave shelter to those persons in their house and these two were nominated under Section 216 IPC.
8(e) On 26.12.2022 vide Rapat no. 23 accused Kulbir Sigh @ Nutri son of Jaswant Singh, Hira Singh son of Sarwan Singh and Davinder Singh son of Ajit Singh were arrested and on 27.12.2022 they were produced before the learned Illaqa Magistrate.
8(f) During the course of investigation, Davinder Singh and Yadwinder Singh @ Yada were nominated and on 27.12.2022 Davinder Singh and Kulbir Singh made disclosure statement that Kulbir Singh along with Yadwinder Singh @ Yada who is presently residing in Manila had concealed one rocket launcher near Marhana and the same was taken from the said place by him along with Hira Singh and kept the same in the jute bag and concealed the same in the mand area and Kulbir Singh has exclusive knowledge of the same.
8(g) On 27.12.2022 Kulbir Singh and Hira Singh in the police custody got recovered one rocket launcher RPG which was taken into possession.
8(h) On 30.12.2022 vide Rapat no. 41 Gursewak Singh son of Sarwan Singh, Kuldeep Singh @ Laddu, Arshdeep Singh Machhi were arrested and Arshdeep Singh was found in possession of 32 air gun along with one bullet 32 bore. Gursewak Singh was found in possession of 32 bore air gun and parts of air gun. Kuldeep Singh @ Laddu was found in possession of country made pistol 315 bore along with three live cartridges of the same bore. 9.
Learned trial Court granted the benefit of regular bail to accused, namely, Jobanpreet alias Joban, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Numberdar, Kuldeep Singh @ Landu, Gurlal Singh @ Galla, Gursewak Singh @ Khali, Surlal Pal
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 8 Singh alias Gurlal Singh alias Lalhi, on the ground that challan had already been presented and conclusion of the trial is likely to take time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping these accused in custody. 10.
Learned State counsel failed to point out that after release on bail, these accused (respondents herein) have violated any terms and conditions of the bail orders as imposed by the trial Court or indulged themselves in any other offence. The considerations for cancellation of bail are entirely different from considerations made at the time of grant of bail to an accused. Hon'ble Apex Court in its recent judgment in Abhimanue etc. vs. State of Kerala, 2025(4) RCR (Criminal) 382, observed as under:- + , -
# .
#
$
% #& # / 0* 11.
While making above noted observations, reliance was placed on three Judges Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in P vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022(15) SCC 211, wherein after analyzing various previous decisions, the distinction between grant of bail and cancellation of bail order has been discussed as under:-
1 (
! 1 (
!
!
!"# $
% &$ 2 ' ( $ $ %$
)
* $
$%
&+&$ * % $ % %
* % *
&%
&$ % $ ,$%&
% ,$ *
$& &,$
$ )
$&
-* %
$
$ $$ % ,
$
& % .
$& & / - . 3 . 3 !
"!
"
"
# $ & $ %
2 ( * * $
$%
&+&$ * % $ % $ % *,
*
*
&% * &$ %0$ ,$%& ) % $ * $ $&* % *
*
) 1& $&
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 9
% &$ *
* $ % % $$ )&% $
* &$
%
.
$
$% &%$ *
.
) .
& $& & )
%
%
.
$ , & / 2$
%$ % *,
% $$ *
% & ,&$ $% )
. $& &,$
$
$
%& *
&$ % $ *
% ,$
$
$ %&
* , ,
$ *
%, .
+. $$ *
%&
4 1 "
!
"
# ( & % . % .
&,$
$ $ & )&%
* )
% $$ % .
&
)
& * $&
% $ *&%
$ ,$ % ,
$ $& % $ $&$
$& .
%
*
.
& , * &,$
$ )
%
&$ % &%
! 3
%
&,
%
) 4 -* ,$&$ $ $
.
. %& $, 5 , .6 -*
* $ ) &$ * $
6 -*
, $
, )
% % -*
, $ *&
) $$ $6 -*
% $
, $ % &
%$6 * -* %& $ $ ) )&% , $, $
6 -* $ 7 .
*
*, & .6 -*
, $ , ,$ * $
. &% &%
%5
, &
$
.6 -*
, $ ,$ *
.%
* $ $&
. + -* . * $ , .
,
*
*
)
$% % &%&
* , . *.
* $ % $ $ .
&$
&
%
9 &$ , $$ &$/ 12.
Learned State counsel failed to point out how the bail orders granted in favour of the respective respondents are perverse or whether the accused (respondents herein) had misused their liberty by indulging in similar/other criminal activities; interfered with the course of trial; attempted to tamper with the evidence; attempt to influence/threaten the witnesses or indulged themselves in activities which would hamper smooth trial or there is likelihood of their fleeing from the Court of justice or they are unavailable during trial or placed themselves beyond the reach of their sureties or did
CRA-D-616 of 2024 & connected matters 10 anything which is unconducive to a fair trial. In the absence of any such circumstances, there is no ground for cancellation of bail orders rendered in respective bail applications in favour of the respondents/accused especially when State slept over for a considerable period to file criminal appeals even after obtaining sanction from Department of Home Affairs & Justice. Hence, all the appeals filed by the appellant-State of Punjab for cancellation of bail granted to the respondents stand dismissed being devoid of merits. A copy of this order be placed in the connected files. (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) (RAMESH KUMARI) JUDGE JUDGE 27.11.2025 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable √Yes/No