Gurpreet Singh Alias Gopi v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.105 Date of Decision: 07.03.2026 GURPREET SINGH ALIAS GOPI

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. A.P. Singh Rehan, Advocate for the complainant.

(Appeared through video conferencing).

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

This is the first petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 99 dated 06.08.2025, registered under Sections 304(2), 3(5), 109 and 249 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Mohkampura, District Amritsar.

2.

Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that complainant Shiv Kumar got recorded his statement before the police stating that his son was running a Computer Centre and on 06.08.2025 at about 05:00/05:15 PM, after closing the Computer Centre, he along with his son was standing in the street when three persons came on a Splendor motorcycle and stopped

near them. On the point of a gun, the said persons allegedly snatched three gold rings, one gold chain, one gold bracelet, one silver chain and one mobile phone iPhone 16 Pro from Dheeraj Wadera, son of the complainant. On the basis of the said statement, the present FIR was registered. During investigation, it came to light that there were in total six accused persons involved in the occurrence. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he conducted the reconnaissance (reiki) of the complainant's son and followed his routine movements at the instance of co-accused Gautam Mehra, Rohit Kumar, Rahul Kumar and Akashdeep Singh. The co-accused thereafter executed the snatching of the aforesaid articles from the victim on 06.08.2025. The FIR was initially registered under Sections 304(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita along with Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, and subsequently Section 109 of BNS was added vide DDR No.15 dated 29.08.2025 and Section 249 of BNS was further added vide DDR No.32 dated 16.09.2025 during the course of investigation. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced only in the supplementary statement of the complainant. It is further contended that one of the co-accused namely Rakhi Mehra has already been granted bail, whereas another co-accused Rohit Kumar, who is alleged to be the main accused, has already been arrested. Learned counsel submits that the only allegation against the present petitioner is that he had conducted reconnaissance (reiki) in the present case and he was not present at the place

of occurrence at the relevant time. It is further argued that the petitioner is in custody since 13.09.2025 and has undergone custody for about five months and twenty days. It is also submitted that the challan has already been presented and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner be released on regular bail. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the present bail application on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner of snatching and offence under Section 109 of the BNS (corresponding Section 307 of IPC). It is submitted that material witnesses are yet to be examined in the present case and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 5.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced only in the supplementary statement of the complainant. The role attributed to the petitioner is limited to conducting reconnaissance in the present case and he was not found present at the spot at the time of the occurrence. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.09.2025 and has already undergone custody for about five months and twenty days. The challan has been presented and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. 6.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi is ordered to

be released on regular bail subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 7.

However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 8.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 07.03.2026 JUDGE Anu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No