Harpreet Singh @ Harry v. State Of Punjab




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (215) CRM-M-26301-2026 Date of Decision: 14.05.2026 HARPREET SINGH @ HARRY ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

Present:

Ms. Prabhjot Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Harmanpreet S. Mander, Advocate for the complainant.

**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL) 1.

The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 483 of BNSS has been invoked for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.252 dated 04.10.2025 under Sections 137(2), 96 of BNS (Sections 363, 366-A of IPC), registered at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. 2.

The translated version of the FIR is reproduced below:- "Statement of xxxx wife of Gurwinder Singh resident of village Sarawan Bodlan age about 43 years, mobile no.95015-2xxxx, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib stated that I am a resident of the above address and I am a housewife and I have three children, the elder son Akashdeep Singh and the younger Ajaypal Singh and the youngest daughter xxxx, whose date of birth is 18.07.2008 and my parents are in village Deon Khera and I had come to stay with my parents for a few days along with my children and my three children were with me. That on 24.09.2025 on Wednesday, at night, we all had dinner and slept, so my children also lay down on the bed next to me and when I opened my eyes at 04 am, I saw that my daughter xxxx, who is a minor, was not on her bed.

So, I quickly woke up my family and told them that my daughter is not on the bed. I do not know where she has gone.

 Ninder Singh, a boy from our village Sarawan Bodlan. We did not find her after in the areas and searching surrounding relatives. Today we came to the police station to record statement to you, that action should be taken against Harpreet Singh alias Harry resident of Sarawa Bodlan. I have recorded my statement to you. I heard it and will be responsible. Sd/- Jaswinder Kaur, above verified statement LTI/- Gurwinder Singh S/O Mangat Singh R/O Sarawan Bodlan Verification Sd/- Kulwant Singh ASI, PS Lambi Date 04.10.2025." 3.

Mr. Harmanpreet S. Mander, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed his vakalatnama. The same is taken on record.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, now aged 24 years, has been falsely implicated in the present FIR, which was registered after a delay of about 10 days, on the basis of the statement made by mother of the prosecutrix, wherein she alleged that the petitioner had enticed away her daughter on the false pretext of marriage. It is submitted that the petitioner and the prosecutrix, age of whom is a disputed question of fact, were well acquainted with each other. The true factual matrix is that the prosecutrix, as per her own admission before the investigating agency in her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, had left her home voluntarily, and thereafter, willingly accompanied the petitioner. Copy of the said statement is submitted in court, which is accordingly taken on record.

There was no element of coercion or undue influence at the end of the petitioner. There is also no cogent evidence on record to substantiate the allegations against the petitioner. Moreover, it is submitted that the matter has even been amicably settled between the parties. The petitioner has already undergone custody of 06 months and 11 days.

5.

Learned counsel for the complainant has not disputed the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties.

 6.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned State counsel states that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 06 months and 11 days. The learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Gurmeet Singh, submits that in the present case, charges were framed on 17.04.2026 and none out of total 15 prosecution witnesses has been examined till date. Moreover, there is one other case registered under the Arms Act against the petitioner, in which he is on bail. Learned State counsel submits that in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 7.

Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

8.



   



 

!

"



  

 




  #

 $






  

    

               

     

  

   

   

        

         

     



  

  

   

   

         

     

   





  





                  

    

     

     

  



  

 

 ! 

   

    

   

 



 

   

 !             

 

 

  

  

 

             

      

  
  
   

   



      

   "    



  

   



  

    

  

 

 



  

 

       

  #    

  
%& 



  





   



'&(&& )

*   # 



+ & ,

  

& ,

  

  



06 months and 11 days&

& -

  

#

 

 

  

  

 # 

 













 





 

  



 





 

  

.



  

 



/ 0 

  



   



 .

 

#  

 

& ,

  .    

   

  # 

+  





 

/

  

 

 

 

.



 

  

      #  



/ ,



  

  )



1 # 

 







   





 & ,

    # 

 



 



  #  

 

  

  



 / 

+  3



3

"

 

 !

" #

   
$ 

 & ) 

    #  





 

/



4 

 

 





 



4

5



 

   56    / 

 #   $ 78 ,

 #  #





& 78 ,

 # 9 5 

 # 78& 78 ,

 #  





+     



+

 & 7 ,

 

 

 

# 

 





# 

   & ,

   

 

.

 

  



  4 #







  



 



 #

 & 1





 

 

 



 

 



 & (& 1    



 







/



   



% 



+ 





*& 

 

  78 

  

(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE May 14, 2026 Ritika Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No