Jasbir Singh Alias Jassi v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.01.2026 Jasbir Singh @ Jassi

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Mr. Dhruv Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Titiksha, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

***** 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.98, dated 18.06.2024, under Sections 120-B, 302, 341, 34 of IPC, 1860 and Section 25(1)(B)(a) of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 148, 149, 307, 201 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Naggal, District Ambala.

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Mohit, son of Sohan Lal. It was alleged that the complainant was running a shop in the name of Premi Tent House in village Balapur, District Ambala and his brother, namely, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu also working with him. It was alleged that on 18.06.2024, the complainant was at his home and his brother, came home to eat food. In the meantime, at about 01/01:15 P.M., Pardeep and Gurjant Singh

@ Diljan Singh came to the house of complainant on a motorcycle and his brother, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu along with Pardeep and Gurjant Singh @ Diljan Singh had gone to the house of his maternal uncle Gulab Singh on the motorcycle. It was alleged that at about 03:15/03:30 P.M., neighbour of complainant, namely, Rahul came to his house and informed him that Pardeep called him and told that his brother, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu and Gurjant Singh @ Diljan Singh were shot by fire arm while going from Khaira to Amipur road and his brother, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu had died and he was taking Gurjant Singh @ Diljan Singh to the hospital for treatment. The complainant along with his family members reached at the place of occurrence where dead body of his brother, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu was lying.

The complainant came to know that Karni son of Satta @ Satpal, Jassi (petitioner), Sukhan and Aman @ Pandit along with 4-5 other persons armed with deadly weapons had restrained the way of his brother, namely, Gurpreet Singh @ Gullu, Pardeep and Gurjant Singh @ Diljan Singh and attacked upon them due to old enmity. Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the accused. On filing of the complaint, the FIR was registered. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Resultantly, the petitioner was arrested on 25.06.2024. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala praying for the grant of bail.

However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 01.10.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the 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 co-accused, namely, Sahil. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 30.10.2025 passed in CRM-M-17208-2025, whereby, co-accused, namely, Sahil has been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner was also armed with gandasi and no injuries have been attributed to him. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2024, however there is no progress in the trial. He has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case. He submits 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 co-accused, who has 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, Sahil. He, however, on instructions from SI Ajmer Singh, has submitted that the petitioner gave a gandasi blow and the said weapon has also been recovered from the petitioner. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record.

5.

Heard.

6.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since 25.06.2024. Coaccused, namely, Sahil is on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with him. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, 06 months & 16 days as on 14.01.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. 7.

This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the

merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides, 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.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 15.01.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No