Gurdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

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

Versus

State of Punjab ..... Respondent

CORAM:

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

Present:

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kuljinder Dhindsa, AAG, 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.88, dated 22.08.2024, under Sections 103(1), 3(5) and 238 of BNS, registered at Police Station Sadar Banga, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar.

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Hardip Singh. It was alleged that on 21.08.2024, the complainant had engaged labour in his fields to bundle the sugar cane crops. It was alleged that at about 3:30 P.M., the complainant had gone to his fields to serve tea to the labourers, then, the labourers working in the fields informed the complainant that one dead body of unknown person was lying in the fields

-2towards back side. The complainant accompanied them and saw the dead body, which was strangulated by hanging with blue colour cloth and his pant and belt was entangled in his feets. There was wound on the back side of his head. It appears that the unknown person was killed by some unknown person. The complainant informed the Sarpanch of the village about the same and they tried to identify the body but the same cannot be identified. They informed the police and the police reached at the spot. The dead body of unknown person was kept in the mortuary of hospital in village Pathlava. Thus, the request was made to take legal action. On the basis of the same, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced.

During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner, namely, Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case. Resultantly, the petitioner was arrested on 07.09.2024. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Sessions Judge, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 20.01.2026. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that evidently the case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidences. He has submitted that neither the petitioner is

-3named in the FIR nor any allegations have been made against him. He has submitted that it is during the investigation, the petitioner has been roped in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused, namely, Harish Kumar. He has submitted that the dispute has been said to be on account of the sharing of money received from selling the opium illegally. He has submitted that except the disclosure statement, there is no credible evidence against the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest. He has submitted that the petitioner is seriously suffering from necrotizing soft tissue infection and he is lodged in the hospital. He has submitted that the material witnesses already stand examined. He has submitted that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner had earlier argued that medical condition of the petitioner is also precarious and this Court, vide order dated 23.04.2026 directed the State to verify the same and to file status report.

5.

In compliance of order dated 23.04.2026, status report dated 29.04.2026 by way of an affidavit of Harjit Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Banga, District SBS Nagar on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed by learned State counsel today in the Court, which is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. 6.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that complicity of the petitioner has been prima facie surfaced during the

-4investigation on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused, namely, Harish Kumar, and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case vide DDR No.28, dated 07.09.2024. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the status report filed. He has submitted that the deceased, namely, Amar Singh, used to supply opium to Harish Kumar, after procuring the same from Uttar Pradesh. He has submitted that the petitioner along with the co-accused has committed the murder of Amar Singh by strangulating him. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 38 prosecution witnesses, 09 witnesses have been examined so far. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record.

7.

Heard.

8.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the case of the prosecution is admittedly based on the circumstantial evidences. Name of the petitioner surfaced in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused. The petitioner is behind bars since 07.09.2024. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, 07 months and 18 days as on 29.04.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. Out of total 38 prosecution witnesses, 09 witnesses have been examined so far.

9.

As per the medical report, the petitioner is said to be suffering from necotizing soft tissue infection and he was admitted in Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh for last more than 04 months and on his discharge, presently, he is admitted in Jail Hospital, Ludhiana.

-510.

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.

11.

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. 12.

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