High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/21574/2025allowed

Manveer Singh Alias Manna v. State Of Punjab

2025-07-16Mrs. Justice Sukhvinder Kaur4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No.223 Case No. : CRM-M-21574-2025 Decided On : July 16, 2025 Manveer Singh alias Manna ....

Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab ....

Respondent CORAM :

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

* * * Present :

Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. P. S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab.

* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.

Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.043 dated 22.05.2022, under Section 379-B(2) IPC, 1860 (Sections 323, 411, 34 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Verka, District Amritsar City. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Deepak Singh who got recorded his statement before the police that on 22.05.2022, he along with his son Abhimandeep Singh went for paying obeisance at Shri Darbar Sahib in the morning at about 04:15 AM and when they reached near Doon School G.T. Road, the petitioner along with five more persons came on motorcycles and stopped them. They were having datar and kirpans with them. All of them assaulted the complainant and also threatened to surrender the valuable

things in his possession. They took his mobile phone along with cash amount of Rs.2000/- from the pocket of complainant. The son of complainant raised hue and cry, on which all the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. The complainant further stated that he came to know that Jaspreet Singh alias Jassi, Arshdeep Singh @ Ashu (son of Jaspal Singh), Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh (son of Tarlochan Singh), Sagar @ Guli, Manveer Singh @ Manna (present petitioner) along with one person, whose name he did not know, had committed the said crime.

Thereafter, investigation was carried out into the matter and during the course of it, accused Jaspreet Singh was arrested and he made the disclosure statement that he along with Manveer Singh @ Manna (present petitioner), Arsh, Ashu, Sagar, in connivance with each other, constituted a gang to loot the people and their gang also committed the aforesaid crime. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that a concocted story has been cooked by the complainant Deepak Singh, who revealed the names of all the accused persons, despite the fact that they were not known to him. After implicating the petitioner and other co-accused in the present case, subsequently on the same day, all of them were nominated in another case FIR No.44 dated 22.05.

2022 under Section 379-B IPC, registered at Police Station Verka, District Amritsar and without any substantial evidence, the petitioner was nominated in one more case bearing FIR No.170 dated 23.05.2022, under Sections 379-B(2), 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Maqboolpura, District Amritsar City. He contended that the investigating agency, without having any substantial evidence, nominated the petitioner in all the three cases along with other co-accused.

also claims parity as co-accused namely Arshdeep Singh @ Ashu, who was similarly situated as the present petitioner, had already been granted regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2023. Coaccused Jaspreet Singh @ Jassi was also nominated in the aforesaid all the three FIRs along with the petitioner and he was granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 27.03.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereas bail application of the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide order dated 17.06.2023. He further contended that no substantial evidence has come on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime in question. He prayed that since trial of the case is likely to take time, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail.

On the last date of hearing, learned State counsel sought time to file Custody Certificate, which has been filed today in the Court and the same is taken on record.

Learned State counsel has opposed the bail petition while contending that apart from the present bail petition, some other cases are also pending against the petitioner. He is not a man of clean antecedents as he indulged in forming a gang to loot money and goods from people. So, he does not deserve the concession of bail. However, he fairly admitted that as per the Custody Certificate dated 15.07.2025, the petitioner has already undergone custody of 03 years and 25 days.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file.

As per the record of the case, the petitioner along with his co-

accused, caused injuries to the complainant and thereafter, also committed snatching. Vide order dated 16.05.2023, passed in CRM-M-22498-2023 and vide order dated 28.08.2023, passed in CRM-M-31334-2023, co-accused namely Arshdeep Singh @ Ashu and Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh, had already been granted regular bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court. Trial of the case is likely to take a long time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars, especially when he has already undergone incarceration of long period of 03 years and 25 days. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. July 16, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No.