Rajiv Kumar Alias Rajeev Kumar v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-64948-2025 DECIDED ON: 18.05.2026 RAJIV KUMAR ALIAS RAJEEV KUMAR .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. Imaan Singh Khara, Advocate, (through VC mode), and Mr. Princepal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking grant of regular bail, in case, FIR No.68, dated 02.05.2025, under Sections 307, 3(5) of BNS, and sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, and later on, challan was presented under sections 307(1), 3(5), 61(2) and 238 of BNS and section 27 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Cantt Bathinda, District Bathinda.

2.

As per allegations in the present case, an incident of snatching allegedly took place on 02.05.2025 at about 10:00 P.M. As per the allegations recorded in the statement of the complainant, namely Ram Partap, he was working at a liquor shop when the accused persons arrived there on two motorcycles. At gunpoint, they allegedly robbed an amount of approximately Rs.10,000/- lying in the drawer of the shop and also took away the mobile phone of the complainant. 3.

As per paragraph No.9 of the status report dated 05.02.2026 filed by the State, petitioner was found involved in three other cases of a similar nature, including offences relating to causing injuries dangerous to life, and all the said three cases were also registered on 05.05.2025. LAVISHA 2026.05.18 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

CRM-M-64948-2025 -24.

Learned State counsel submits that charges were framed on 03.04.2026 and, therefore, without recording the statement of complainant, petitioner does not deserve the concessional relief of regular bail.

5.

Learned State counsel further submits that, after arrest of the accused in the present case, a licensed revolver was recovered from him. However, he could not explain in whose name, the said arms licence had been issued.

6.

In view of the above, and since complainant is yet to be examined, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition for regular bail after examination of the complainant in the witness box. 7.

Trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the complainant at the first instance.

8.

With the aforementioned observations, present petition stands disposed of.

9.

Let copy of this order be forwarded to the trial Court for information and necessary compliance.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 18.05.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.05.18 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh