Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi v. State Of Punjab




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (215) CRM-M-27963-2026 Date of Decision: 21.05.2026 GURPREET SINGH @ GOPI ......Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr. Ranjodh Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

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

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS (corresponding to Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 176 dated 04.08.2025 under Sections 137(2), 87, 61(2), 64 of BNS (Sections 363, 366, 120-B, 376 of IPC) and Section 4 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Khalra, District Tarn Taran. 2.

The translated version of the FIR is reproduced below:- ""Statement of Hardeep Singh son of Joginder Singh resident of Sidhwan age about 30 years mobile number 99146-7xxxx. Stated that I am a resident of the above address and I do manual labor work. My marriage took place with xxxx daughter of Mukhtiar Singh resident of Dodhe. Three children were born in my house. My eldest son is Harpreet Singh age about 16 years, younger to him is Lovedeep Singh age about 15 years, and the youngest is xxxx, whose age according to the birth certificate date of birth 07-05-2011 is about 14 years 2 months. On 02-08-2025, we had slept in the courtyard of our house after having our meal. In the morning when I woke up, I saw that my daughter xxxx was not on her cot. I searched a lot nearby and in the neighborhood but my daughter was not found.

I have full belief that Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi son of Gurlal Singh resident of Sidhwan, on the advice of his uncle's son Husanpreet Singh son of Kala Singh resident of Sidhwan, enticed and took away my minor daughter xxxx under the pretext of marriage. Till now I kept searching for my daughter among relatives and nearby, but I did not find my daughter.

 to the police station to give a statement, when you met us. Legal action be taken against them. They have enticed my daughter and taken her away under the pretext of marriage, and I have produced the photocopy of her birth certificate and 8th class certificate regarding the age of my daughter to you. Statement heard, got written, and is correct. Sd/- Hardeep Singh." 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, aged about 19 years, has been falsely implicated in the present FIR, which was lodged after a delay of about two days, on the basis of the statement of father of prosecutrix, alleging that the petitioner, in connivance with coaccused Husanpreet Singh, had enticed away his daughter on the 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 prior to the alleged occurrence. Be that as it may, there is no cogent evidence on record to substantiate the allegations leveled against the petitioner. Moreover, the prosecutrix as well as her parents, in their respective depositions before the learned Trial Court, did not support the case of the prosecution and were consequently declared hostile. Reliance in this regard is placed upon their respective testimonies, annexed as Annexures P-2 to P-4. It is submitted that the petitioner who

  

  







4.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She states that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. She 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 09

 . She, on instructions from ASI Salwinder Singh, submits that in the present case, charges were framed on 28.11.2025 and out of total 11

 prosecution witnesses, 03 have been examined till date. Learned State counsel further submits that in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 5.

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

6.

B 

  

 !

  "#  $ 

  

 



 !

  

 &




  

    

               

    

  

   

   

        

         

   



  

  

   

   

         

     

   





  





                  

    

     

     

  



  

 

 ! 

   

    

   

 

 

   

 !          

 

 

  

  

 

             

      

  
  
   

   



     

   "    



     



  

    

  

 

 



  

 

       

  #    

  


!







 '

((  )

* 

(( 

 %

!  +



, 

 



 





,  

   





-



 



!!

 

'

.

 

  %

 !

  

 

% 

   

!  

 

 !  

 

 



  







/ 

  

0

1 



    

 

 /

 % 

 



! 

 %  

 +

   !

!   



.

 

 ! !





 





 

0

  !  

 

! !

 



   !/

,   / 



  

 

% +







0 



 



/

 



   

 

   %

!

 

0

,  

    2 (




-



 

    

   



!



,    % 

   

 %

     



+4

  "4  $  

 !

" #

   
$  

 (

2  

%





0

5 

      



 

5 

6  



   
67     0

% 

& 89 ,  %

 %

!  

89 ,  % :6   %89

89 ,  %

   

+    + 

8!9 , 



 















8!9 , 

 

/

   



5  %







 







 %

!

% ((

-

! 

 

!





(

-  

 !

 !





0  



 

+





(

1

 

 89

  

(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE May 21, 2026 Ritika Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No