Arshdeep Singh Alias Basi v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 03.07.2026 ARSHDEEP SINGH ALIAS BASSI
...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present :
Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, D.A.G., Punjab.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) Petitioner-Arshdeep Singh alias Bassi, aged 25 years, has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.18 dated 09.03.2025, registered under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 61(2), 254, 249, 247, 262, 111 BNS and Sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Mehta, District Amritsar Rural. 2.
As per the case of the prosecution, complainant Gurwinder Singh got the present FIR registered stating that on 08.03.2025, a langar was organized for the village community, in which he along with his brother Varinder Pal Singh @ Vicky was a volunteer. At about 2:35 p.m., three young men arrived on a motorcycle with their faces uncovered. After stopping the motorcycle, the two pillion riders pushed Varinder Pal Singh @ Vicky to the ground, and thereafter all three of them started firing at him while he was lying on the ground.
-2On the third day of investigation, i.e., 10.03.2025, secret information was received regarding the involvement of certain persons in the crime, namely: (i) Baljinder Singh @ Dony, (ii) Jobanjit Singh @ Billa Arjan Manga, (iii) Manu (iv) Kaushal Chaudhary, (v) Joban Saidoke, (vi) Prabh Dasuwal, (vii) Gurwinder Singh @ Faridi, (viii) Gagandeep Singh @ Daddi, (ix) Ratandeep Kumar and (x) Pardeep Kumar. After the arrest of accused Pardeep Kumar on 10.03.2025 and on the basis of his disclosure statement, Kawaljeet Kaur, Amrik Singh and Anshuman @ Danish were also implicated.
When accused-Anshuman @ Danish was arrested, he disclosed the name of the petitioner-Arshdeep Singh alias Bassi as also one of the accused in the case.
On 11.03.2025, a supplementary statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of complainant Gurwinder Singh was recorded, wherein three more persons, namely Sukhwinder Kaur, Kulwant Singh and Sarabjit Singh were also arrayed as accused.
It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioners that through the supplementary statement dated 11.03.2025, a total of 13 accused were named, and during the course of investigation, as many as 33 persons were ultimately arrayed as accused.
During investigation, it further surfaced that the persons who allegedly fired collectively upon deceased Varinder Pal Singh @ Vicky were:(i) Bikramjit Singh, (ii) Sharanjeet Singh, and (iii) Bishambarjit Singh (who has since expired).
-3Submissions on Behalf of the Petitioner 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argue that the present petitioner was not alleged to have been present at the spot at the time of occurrence. Three persons allegedly involved in the actual firing, namely Bikramjit Singh, Sharanjeet Singh, and Bishambarjit Singh (since deceased), are not the petitioners before this Court.
4.
Primary allegation against the petitioner is that he hatched a criminal conspiracy to eliminate deceased Varinder Pal Singh @ Vicky. Co-accused namely, Pardeep Kumar, Kawaljit Kaur, Amrik Singh, Anshuman @ Danish, Sukhwinder Kaur, Kulwant Singh and Sarbjit Singh, who were also similarly situated, have already been granted bail. 5.
Counsel for the petitioner further submits that there were only two material witnesses, namely complainant Gurwinder Singh and Mehnga Singh, and both have resiled from their earlier statements while deposing on oath before the Court.
Submissions on Behalf of the State 6.
Learned State counsel does not dispute the aforementioned factual position, including the role attributed to the accused persons. He is also unable to controvert the submission that the material witnesses, namely Gurwinder Singh and Mehnga Singh, have turned hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution.
7.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book as well as the documents appended thereto. 8.
Primary allegations of firing are against accused Bikramjit Singh, Sharanjeet Singh and Bishambarjit Singh (since deceased). Present
-4petitioner is not alleged to have been present at the place of occurrence. The case against him is primarily based on allegations of conspiracy and ancillary roles.
It is also a matter of record that two material witnesses have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case. Furthermore, petitioner is in custody since April 2025, i.e., for approximately fourteen months, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court finds merit in the prayer made by the petitioner. Accordingly, present petitions are allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 9.
Any of the discussion done and recorded hereabove, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.
10.
Petitions stand disposed of.
July 03, 2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No