Tejinderpal Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 07.05.2026 TEJINDERPAL SINGH .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. H.S. Dhindsa, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District No.

(s) Tejinderpal Singh, aged about 28 years 08.03.2026 333, 109, 324(4), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS (corresponding to sections 452, 307, 427, 506, 148, 149 of IPC) and sections 25, 27 of Arms Act Verowal Tarn Taran 2.

After hearing the submissions addressed by counsel for the petitioner, on 24.04.2026, following order was passed:- "2.

As per the allegations, petitioner, who is the nephew of complainant Balbir Singh, on 06.03.2026 at about 10:35 PM, along with other coaccused, forcibly entered the house of the complainant and fired a shot at him. However, the shot missed the target and did not result in any injury.

3.

Petitioner is serving as a constable in the Punjab Police. Co-accused, Pargat Singh @ Sonu Gulalipuria, has already been granted the concession of interim anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 02.04.2026 passed in CRM-M-17804-2026 (Annexure P-2). However, the said co-accused neither fired any shot nor had any active role in the commission of the alleged offence.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter.

6.

Adjourned to 07.05.2026.

7.

Let the State, at the first instance, verify whether the pistol allegedly used by the petitioner was his service pistol or any other firearm. State shall also ascertain whether, during investigation of the place of occurrence, any bullet or empty cartridge was recovered. Thereafter, a status report be filed, specifically addressing these aspects, on or before the next date of hearing."

3.

Learned State counsel has filed status report dated 06.05.2026 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place on the file. 4.

In the status report, allegations against the petitioner have been reiterated in paragraph Nos.7 and 10, wherein it has been specifically stated that no service pistol was ever issued to the petitioner and he neither possesses any valid arms licence nor any weapon registered in his name.

5.

Mr. Arnav Sood, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant, and files his power of attorney in Court today, which is taken on record.

6.

At this stage, learned counsel for the complainant submits that, as per the CCTV footage available in his mobile phone, petitioner can be seen holding a pistol.

However, upon a specific query put by the Court, learned counsel fairly admits that there is no CCTV footage showing the petitioner firing any shot.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that allegations levelled in the FIR are false and have been motivated by political rivalry. It is contended that Block Samiti elections were held two to three months prior to the alleged incident, in which wife of co-accused Pargat Singh @ Sonu Gulalipuria was elected. Owing to the said political enmity, complainant has allegedly got the present FIR registered. 8.

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that, during the course of investigation, Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and recovered three empty cartridges of 7.62 MM bore from the spot on 08.03.2026.

9.

This Court has heard the submissions addressed by learned counsel for the parties and has also perused the record available on file. 10.

Alleged incident in the present case took place on 06.03.2026 at about 10:35 P.M. Whether recovery of the empty cartridges, stated to have been effected on 08.03.2026, is genuine or otherwise, shall be a matter to be examined during the course of trial by learned trial Court.

11.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it necessary to keep the present petition pending any further and, accordingly, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same, with the direction to the petitioner to join the investigation within two weeks from today or as and when called by the investigating officer, and in the

eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 12.

Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 13.

With the directions recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 07.05.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No