Daler Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1251+255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.21880 of 2026 Date of decision: 04.05.2026 Daler Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent Jagmanpreet Singh @ Funny .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Mr. Sarbjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions.

Me. Ekompal Sagoo, AAG, Punjab.

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

By this order, I dispose of the above mentioned two petitions arising out of the same FIR.

2.

Present petitions have been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case bearing FIR No.93, dated 26.09.2024, under Sections 103, 191(3), 190, 333, 238 of BNS and Sections 25, 27, 54, 59 of Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Kathunangal, District Amritsar. 3.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case

-2was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Raghbir Singh. It was alleged that on 25.09.2024, at around 06:30 PM, his brother Bhagwant Singh was milking the cattles and in the meantime, Amanpreet Singh and Dilraj Singh along with 5 unknown persons duly armed with kirpans entered their house. His brother, namely, Bhagwant Singh started talking to them, then Amanpreet Singh took out the pistol and fired upon his brother with intention to kill. The gunshots hit on the chest and shoulder of his brother, thereafter Dilraj Singh exhorted Amanpreet Singh to fire him on his head, otherwise he will survive and thereafter he again fired on his head. On receiving the fire arm injuries, he was shifted to Escort Hospital where he was declared dead. Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the accused persons.

On the basis of the same, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, complicity of both the petitioners, namely, Daler Singh (in CRM-M-21880-2026) and Jagmanpreet Singh @ Funny (in CRM-M-224412026) surfaced and thus, both were arrayed as an accused in the present case. Resultantly, both the petitioners were arrested on 26.09.2024. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioners approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar declined both the bail applications filed by petitioners vide orders dated 18.10.2025 and 19.03.

2026, respectively. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court by way of filing the present petitions praying for the grant of regular bail.

-34.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, prays for the grant of regular bail to the petitioners on the basis of parity with that of the co-accused, namely, Vijay @ Vijaypreet and Rachpal Singh, who have been granted bail by this Court. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 18.02.2026 passed in CRM-M-37138-2025 and CRM-M45090-2025, whereby, co-accused, namely, Vijay @ Vijaypreet and Rachpal Singh have been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioners are behind bars since 26.09.2024. He has submitted that on the basis of the parity, the petitioners deserve to be granted bail as the case of the petitioners is similar to that of the said co-accused, who have already been granted bail by this Court. 5.

Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioners as stated above and has not denied that the petitioners are at par with the co-accused, namely, Vijay @ Vijaypreet and Rachpal Singh. He however has opposed the same and has submitted that complicity of the petitioners has been duly established during the investigation. He has submitted that the petitioners are involved in other cases as well. He has produced custody certificate of both the petitioners today in the Court which are taken on record. 6.

Heard.

7.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioners are behind bars since 26.09.2024. Admittedly, co-accused of the petitioners, namely, Vijay @ Vijaypreet and Rachpal Singh are on bail and the cases of the petitioners as stated are at par with them. Custody certificates produced would show that the petitioners have suffered an incarceration of 01 year, 07 months & 02 days as on

-403.05.2026. It further reflects that the petitioners are involved other cases as well.

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.

9.

This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioners succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity.

10.

Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 11.

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

12.

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

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 04.05.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No