Jaspreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No.215 Case No. : CRM-M-24509-2025 Decided On : July 02, 2025 Jaspreet Singh ....

Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab ....

Respondent CORAM :

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

* * * Present :

Mr. Sukhmeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Navdeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.

:

Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.77 dated 17.04.2025, under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at Police Station City Moga, District Moga. The FIR in question was registered on the complaint made by one Kuldeep Singh @ Deep, stating therein that he was doing job at Vishal Mega Mart and on 08.03.2025, after parking his motorcycle in the basement parking of Vishal Mega Mart, he went to attend his duty. During lunch break, he found his motorcycle missing from there. On inquiry, he came to know that Akashdeep and Jassu had stolen his motorcycle. He also obtained CCTV footage and reported the matter to the police, on the basis of which, the present FIR was registered against aforesaid Akashdeep and the

petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that FIR in this case was registered with unexplained delay of about one month. The petitioner is not named in the FIR as his name is Jaspreet Singh and not Jassu. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars.

Notice of motion was issued in this case on 07.05.2025 and Status Report was called from the State, which has been filed today in Court and is taken on record.

Learned State counsel, while opposing the present bail petition, contended that the petitioner along with his co-accused had committed theft of motorcycle in question, which had been captured in CCTV footage and the same is sufficient to connect the petitioner with the offence in the present case. So, the petitioner does not deserve the benefit of anticipatory bail. Heard.

In the Status Report, filed today in Court, it has been mentioned that co-accused Akashdeep, in his disclosure statement, stated that he and his co-accused Jassu had stolen the motorcycle and concealed it in the house of his aunt namely Goro resident of Village Kussa. Akashdeep also got recovered said motorcycle, as per his disclosure statement. Thus, recovery of alleged stolen motorcycle has already been effected in the present case and now, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is not required for any purpose and no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the

present petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on furnishing bail/surety bonds, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions, as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS. It will be open for the Investigating Officer to call the petitioner to join investigation, if so required, by issuing a written notice in this regard. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions mentioned in Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

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 02, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No.