Taranjit Singh @ Taran @ Tanu v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.05.2026 1.
TARANJIT SINGH @ TARAN @ TANU ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT 2.
GURSHARAN SINGH @ GORA ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. N.K.Jandoli, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioners are seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.28 dated 23.03.2026 under sections 310(4), 310(5), 111 BNS 2023 [Corresponding Sections 399, 402 IPC] and 25 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Garhdiwal, District Hoshiarpur.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that while the police party was allegedly conducting routine checking at Adda Ram Tatwali on 23.03.2026 a secret informer informed the police that the petitioners along with other co-accused were allegedly present near Mohalla Ranjitgarh, close to Dhussi Bandh towards the jungle side, while armed with illegal weapons and allegedly planning to commit dacoity in Garhdiwala City. It is further alleged that ASI Satpal Singh, who was allegedly in civil dress, was deputed
to verify the said information and after about 15 minutes, he allegedly confirmed the presence of the accused persons and their alleged intention to commit dacoity.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioners are in custody for the last 02 months and 03 days. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioners. 4.
Notice of motion.
5.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioners on the ground of gravity of allegations. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificates in Court, which are taken on record. He further submits that as per the custody certificates, the petitioners are in custody for the last 02 months and 03 days.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7.
After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that only Kirpan has been recovered from petitioner - Taranjit Singh, however, nothing has been recovered from petitioner - Gursharan Singh; the petitioners are in custody for the last 02 months and 03 days; though petitioner-Taranjit Singh is involved in one more case under Sections 304(2)/317(2) BNS but he is on bail in that case, however, petitioner - Gursharan Singh is not involved in any other case; the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time and continuous detention of the petitioners would
not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners during the pendency of the trial. 8.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
9.
Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 10.
It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order the petitioners are found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 11.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(H.S.GREWAL) 29.05.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No