Jodhvir Singh Alias Jodha v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 14.11.2025 Jodhvir Singh @ Jodha ..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .......Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
Present:
Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Raj Karan Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1.
Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.110, dated 08.07.2023, under Sections 395, 342, 148, 149, 411 IPC and Sections 25, 27, 29 of Arms Act (Sections 411/412 and 120-B IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar Rural. 2.
Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Harmandeep Singh, Inspector PUNGRAIN, Godown Bal Kalan, Jahangir Road, Amritsar. It was alleged that in the said godown, the Department of PUNGRAIN stored the wheat purchased by it. It was alleged that on 07.07.2023, six chowkidars were deputed for night duty in the godown and in the intervening night of 07/08.07.2023 at about 03:19 A.M., the complainant received a call that at about 12:15 A.M., 30-35 persons
-2entered into the godown by scaling the wall. The said persons were armed with kirchs, kirpans, datars and 2-3 persons were having pistols. They detained all the chowkidars in a room and loaded two trucks with wheat. On checking, it was found that 1063 bags of wheat were stolen. On the stolen bags of wheat 'Punjab Sarkar Fasli Saal 2023-24' was written. Each bag was containing 50 kgs of wheat and thus, total stolen wheat was 531 quintal 50 kgs. Thus, request was made to take action against the accused. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, name of the petitioner was surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case. Resultantly, the petitioner was arrested on 14.07.2023.
The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar praying for the grant of bail, however after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 03.11.2025. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM-M-243102024, however, the same was allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.01.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner has again approached this Court by way of filing the present second petition praying for grant of regular bail.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the coaccused, namely, Manpreet Singh and Mangal Singh @ Preet. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the orders dated 03.07.2024 and 13.10.2025 passed in CRM-M-61268-2023 and CRM-M-22704-2025,
-3whereby, co-accused, namely, Manpreet Singh and Mangal Singh @ Preet have been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 14.07.2023 and thus, has suffered an incarceration of more than 02 years. He has submitted that on the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail as the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said coaccused, who have already been granted bail. 4.
Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Manpreet Singh and Mangal Singh @ Preet. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 24 prosecution witnesses, 12 witnesses including the eye witness have been examined. He has submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases as well. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. 5.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since 14.07.2023. Co-accused, namely, Manpreet Singh and Mangal Singh @ Preet are on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with them. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 02 years, 03 months and 6 days as on 13.11.2025. It further reflects that the petitioner is involved in 03 other cases, however in one case, he is on bail. Out of total 24 prosecution witnesses, 12 witnesses, including the eye witness, have been examined. 7.
This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the
-4sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity.
8.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 9.
It is being clarified that in case the petitioner does not furnish bail/surety bonds within a period of one week from today, his custody will not be counted in the present case after one week. 10.
Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 14.11.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :
Yes/No Whether Reportable :
Yes/No