Anshdeep Singh Alias Ansh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 01.07.2026 Anshdeep Singh @ Ansh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present :

Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG Punjab **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Anshdeep Singh @ Ansh, aged 19 years 21.04.2025 109, 3(5) of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 307, 34 IPC) and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, 1959 (offence under Section 61(2) of BNS, 2023) (erstwhile Section 120-B IPC, 1860) and Section 25(8) of Arms Act, 1959 added later on) City Tarn Taran Tarn Taran 2.

FIR was got registered at the instance of complainant-Gurpreet Singh, stating therein that on 21.04.2025, he alongwith his nephew Jagbir Singh and Ansh

S/o Kuldeep Singh were going on a motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-146485 to meet their sister Sandeep Kaur. At about 6.22 p.m., when they reached at gali Hansli Wali, Mohalla Guru Ka Khu, Tarn Tarn, two young co-villagers also came on a motorcycle namely Ansh S/o Gagan Chitri (present petitioner) and Jashan, who both were already known to them. Two gun shots were fired by petitioner and one of the fire shot caused injury on the lift thigh of Jagbir Singh. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner clarifies that in the FIR it has been wrongly translated as left eye instead of left thigh. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that co-accused Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky was implicated in the present case only on the basis of disclosure statement of the petitioner-Anshdeep Singh and after investigation of the case challan was presented on 16.03.2026 and charges were framed on 30.04.2026. He further argues that out of total 16 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date, therefore, trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and, thus, prays for grant of regular bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel while opposing the bail submits that the petitioner is inside jail since 20.12.2025 for a custody period of approximately 06 months and 06 days and one country made pistol of .32 bore alongwith two live cartridges was recovered from him. 5.

On being asked by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner clarifies that actually there is no injury suffered by injured-Jagbir Singh, as there is no medico legal examination on him. Further more, had there been any dangerous or grievous injury, there would be no reason for lack of medical examination upon him. Thus, the allegations need to be examined thoroughly in its entirety and the weapon needs to be connected with the crime, only if the bullet fired by the

petitioner is recovered during investigation by the investigating team. 6.

Considering all the aspects and other relevant facts recorded here above, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 7.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 8.

The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. 9.

It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. 10.

Petition stands disposed of.

Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. July 01, 2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE reena Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No