Jaspreet Ram Alias Jassi v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on: 01.08.2025
Pronounced on: 20.08.2025 Jaspreet Ram alias Jassi
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Ranwant Singh Sangha, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, DAG, Punjab.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 31.10.2024 Mehna, District 111, 111(2), 111(3), 111(4), Moga, Punjab 318(4), 341(2) of BNS 2023 and 25(6), 25(7), 25(8) of Arms Act 1959 1.
The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.
2.
Per paragraph 8 of the bail petition as well as custody certificate dated 31.07.2025, the petitioner has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No.
FIR No.
Date Offenses Police Station 13.08.2024 115(2), 126(2), 133, 191 BNS Baghapurana 27.07.2024 115, 190, 117(2) BNS Baghapurana 17.05.2025 341, 324, 148, 149, 326 IPC Baghapurana 28.08.2020 307, 326, 324, 452, 148, 149 IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act Baghapurana 07.10.2023 452, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149 IPC Baghapurana 3.
The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:
"4. That brief facts of the case are that on 31.10.2024 a police party headed by ASI Balwinder Singh of CIA Staff, Moga alongwith printer and laptop was present at Bus Stand Mehna, situated at Moga-Ludhiana Road, then special informer came there and informed that Gurdeep Singh Neeta son of Major Singh r/o Khosa Pando, Lovepreet Singh (@Lovi son of Buta Singh resident of Khosa Pando, Gobind Singh Kundan son of Resham Singh r/o Manuke, Davinder Singh @ Baba son of Avtar Singh r/o Kale Ke, District Moga. Jaspreet Ram @ Jassi son of Tarsem Lal resident of Rajeana who are habitual of committing organized crime as one gang member and earlier also various cases have been registered against them and they are proclaimed offender.
They are gathering in order to commit some big crime in Moga City and among them Gurdeep Singh Neeta along with illegal ammunition in Mohindra XUV colour White No DL.12CN7991 which bears forged Plat number is present near Godam Link Road Village Bughipura Main GT Road Moga Ludhiana and is waiting for remaining accomplices. If raid be conducted now then Gurdeep Singh @Neetal could be apprehended and illegal arms ammunition could be recovered from him. The information is solid and reliable therefore act of Gurdeep Singh @ Neeta.
Lovepreet Singh @Lavi, Gabind Singh @ Kundan, Gobind Singh @ Kundan @ Baba Ram Jassi have constituted gang for committing organize crimes and are coming by pasting forged number on the vehicle and possessing weapons the ingredients of offence undersection 111, 111(2), 111(3), 111(4), 318(4), 341(2) BNS 25 (6), (7), (8)-54-59 of Arms Act is made out against them. So, ASI Balwinder Singh got registered the present case by sending the ruqa to the police station.
5. That then police party headed by ASI Balwinder Singh moved towards the place informed by the informer. When police party reached near Godam Link Road, Bughipura Main GT Road, Moga-Ludhiana, then one Mahindra XUV car was spotted which was lying parked near Bus Stand. Then ASI Balwinder Singh got stopped the vehicle and apprehended the driver of said car, with the help of police party. On enquiry driver disclosed his name as Gurdeep Singh @ Neeta son of Major Singh r/o Khosa Pando. During search of Gurdeep Singh @ Neeta one country made 32 bore pistol was recovered, which was hanging backside of his jeans near waist. During checking of pistol, 2 live cartridges of 32 bore were recovered from its magazine. During checking of said Mahindra XUV bearing no. DL12CN7991, two number plates i.e. DL12CN-7991 and PB29AF-3284 were recovered. Parcel of recovered country made pistol was prepared."
4.
The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. Counsel further submits that the petitioner would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State may file an application to revoke not only this bail before the concerned Court but also in cases which are pending against him having jurisdiction over those FIR(s), which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and may do so at their discretion, to which the petitioner shall have no objection.
5.
The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 6.
It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:
"B. Evidence against the petitioner: Petitioner was apprehended red handed and from his possession one country made 32 bore pistol was recovered and during checking of said pistol 2 live cartridges of 32 bore were recovered from its magazine. So there is sufficient evidence against the petitioner."
REASONING:
7.
There is sufficient primafacie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. As concerned for the involvement of petitioner in organized crime that is a matter of evidence, petitioner's connectivity with the gangs or repeatedly involvement of heinous crime.
8.
Per paragraph 4 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since 13.11.2024. Per the custody certificate dated 27.07.2025 the petitioner's total custody in this FIR is 08 months & 12 days.
9.
Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for further pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 10.
Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. 11.
Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds
to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 12.
While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:
1.
AADHAR number 2.
Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.
3.
Mobile number (If available) 4.
E-Mail id (If available) 13.
This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms. 14.
The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.
15.
Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction].
Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days from release from prison and inform the Investigator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and take it back in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the offense. 16.
The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that "The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the
necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed."
17.
It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 18.
The significant consideration for granting bail is that the Court aims to give the petitioner another chance to course-correct, reform, and reintegrate into the community as an ideal citizen. To ensure that the petitioner also abides by the assurance made on the petitioner's behalf by not repeating the offence or indulging in any crime, it shall be desirable to impose the following additional condition. 19.
This bail is conditional, with the foundational condition being that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, the State shall file an application to revoke this bail as well as bail granted in other cases before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over those FIR(s), which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and as per their discretion, they may cancel these bail.
20.
Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 21.
A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 22.
Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 20.08.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:
No.