Sheela Singh Alias Pargat v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 24.02.2026 Sheela Singh alias Pargat . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Amandeep Kaur, 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 here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Sheela Singh alias Pargat 12.03.2025 25 of Arms Act, 1959 Gate Hakima Amritsar 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the allegations, one .32 bore country-made pistol along with a magazine and two live cartridges were recovered from the co-accused - Roshanlal alias Happy, who has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.08.2025, passed in CRM-M-33629-2025, titled as, "Roshanlal alias Happy v. State of Punjab" (Annexure P-4). Further submits that after completion of the investigation, challan has been submitted, and petitioner has already undergone incarceration for a period of more than six months. Name of the petitioner has been disclossed in the statement of co-accused - Roshanlal alias Happy, as supplier of the weapon.

3.

Learned counsel argues that petitioner is inside jail for the last

- 2 - about more than a period of seven months. However, on being arrested, nothing was recovered from his possession. All the offences are triable by the Court of learned Magistrate, and proceedings are not likely to conclude in the near future. Therefore, claiming parity, learned counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4.

On advance notice and in response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, submits that petitioner has already undergone about 07 months period inside jail and apart from the present case, petitioner is involved in seven more cases. However, learned State counsel is unable to make it clear that whether petitioner was convicted in any other case or not. However, he did not dispute any of the factual submissions presented by the petitioner's counsel before this Court, today.

5.

This Court has heard the submissions addressed by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record available before it. It is noticed that the present case is triable by the Court of learned Magistrate and the petitioner has already undergone incarceration for a period of more than seven months.

It is further noticeable that co-accused, namely, Roshanlal alias Happy, from whose possession the alleged recovery was effected, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.08.2025. The petitioner, on the other hand, has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of disclosure statement, and no recovery has been effected from his possession.

In these circumstances, and also keeping in view the principle of parity, this Court deems it appropriate not to curtail the personal liberty of the petitioner for an indefinite period.

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.

6.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any

- 3 - threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

7.

Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

8.

Petition stands disposed of.

Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE February 24, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No