Manpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision: 22.7.2024 Manpreet Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Mikhail Kad, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Inderjeet Singh Ladher, DAG, Punjab.

***** FIR No.

Dated Police Station Section/s 9.3.2024 State Operation Cell, SAS Nagar 25, 25(7), 25(8) of Arms Act read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of the aforementioned FIR.

2.

The FIR was lodged on the basis of secret information received by the police to the effect that one Rakesh Kumar brings illegal arms and ammunition from Madhya Pradesh and supplied the same in Punjab and that on the given day he was proceeding to supply the same at Zirakpur to one Harmandeep and Manish Kundan. Pursuant to receipt of said information, police laid barricades and was able to apprehend aforesaid Rakesh Kumar from whose possession, 7 pistols of .32 bore alongwith 5 live cartridges of .32 bore were

( 2 ) recovered. It is further the case of prosecution that during the course of interrogation the aforesaid Rakesh Kumar disclosed that the weapons recovered from him had been delivered to him by Manpreet Singh. Said Manpreet Singh (petitioner) was arrested on 10.3.2024 and from his possession, 1 pistol .32 bore and 5 live cartridges were recovered. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is nowhere named in the FIR and came to be nominated subsequently on the basis of a disclosure statement, which would hardly carry any evidentiary value. 4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submitted that since recovery of illegal weapons was also effected from the petitioner, his complicity is clearly evident. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last about 4 months and 8 days and that charges are yet to be framed and as many as 25 PWs have been cited. It has also been informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. 5.

This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Without commenting anything as regards the merits of the case but having regard to the custody of the petitioner i.e. about 4 months and 8 days and the fact that the trial has not even commenced till date and as many as 25 PWs have been cited and while also bearing in mind the clean antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that further detention of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose.

7.

The instasnt petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the

( 3 ) satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

22.7.2024 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) Geeta Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No