Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi @ Seeti v. State Of Punjab

::1::

(223)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28890-2026 (O & M) Date of Decision: 26.05.2026 Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi @ Seeti ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Ms. Palvi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in this third petition under Section 483 BNSS/439 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.158 dated 25.11.2021 under Section 302, 201 IPC (corresponding Sections 103, 238 BNS respectively) registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar. 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR is silent regarding the identity of the deceased who was later known to be Gurpreet Singh alias Goga. No accused person is named in the FIR. However, after two weeks of the occurrence on 09.12.2021, the statement of Jasvir Singh was recorded to the effect that on 24.11.2021, his nephewGurpreet Singh alias Goga had gone with Bahadur Singh alias Chitti on his motorcycle bearing registration No.PB 08 CZ 474. Later, on 27.11.2021 he had come to know that a half-burnt body of a person has been recovered in

::2::

the area of Police Station Mehatpur whom he identified as Gurpreet Singh @ Goga. On enquiry, he came to know that his nephew has been murdered by Gurjit Singh alias Jagga (since granted the concession of bail vide order dated 12.03.2026, Annexure P-3) and Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi (petitioner) in connivance.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that other than the statement of Jasvir Singh under Section 161 Cr.P.C. which is based on suspicion alone, there is no inculpatory evidence against the petitioner. As the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2021 but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail, moreso, when a co-accused/Gurjit Singh @ Jagga has been granted the concession of regular bail.

4.

The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that the petitioner is an accused in 09 more cases. Therefore, there is every possibility that the petitioner would abscond from justice in case he is granted the concession of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2021, that none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far and that a co-accused/Gurjit Singh Jagga has been granted the concession of bail.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.

The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial.

::3::

Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2021 but none of the 20 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial in the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required, moreso, when a coaccused has been granted the similar concession of bail. 7.

Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi @ Seeti is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8.

The petitioner shall appear on the first Monday of every month before the local police station till the conclusion of the trial and furnish an affidavit each time that he is not involved in any crime other than the cases referred to in the custody certificate dated 25.05.2026. 11.

If any attempt whatsoever is made by the petitioner and/or his family members/friends to contact/threaten/intimidate any of the witnesses of the present occurrence, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order. 12.

In addition, the petitioner (or anybody on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from Trial without sufficient cause.

::4::

13.

The petitioner shall surrender his passport (if not already surrendered) before the Trial Court concerned and it shall not be released to him under any circumstances whatsoever.

14.

The petition stands disposed of.

15.

Since the main petition has been allowed, no order needs to be passed in the pending application(s), if any. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE May 26, 2026 sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable :- Yes/No