Sarabjit Singh alias Sam v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-1725-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 CRM-M-1725-2025 Reserved on: 07.05.2025 Pronounced on: 19.05.2025 Sarabjit Singh alias Sam ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 65 11.03.2021 Chheharta, District 364, 365,452, 323, 427, 336, Amritsar 34 IPC & 25 of Arms Act 1.
Legal Reasoning
The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above came before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail. 2. Per paragraph 10 of the bail petition as well as custody certificated dated 06.05.2025, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. 1 2 140 388 3 4 5 6 7 280 73 68 28 565 Offenses Date 10.07.2019 420, 465, 467 IPC 04.10.2023 406, 420, 120B IPC and 24 of Immigration Act 22.09.2023 471, 474, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act Police Station Kotwali, Kapurthala Sohana City Kharar 17.03.2021 420, 406, 120B IPC 13.03.2021 323, 341, 506, 427 IPC Chherretta Chherretta and 25 of Arms Act 22.02.2021 420, 120B IPC and 13 Travel of Punjab Professionals Regulation Act 10.10.2023 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC and 24 of Immigration Act Lopoke Karnal City ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 1 2 CRM-M-1725-2025 8 448 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 112 66 72 39 346 17 10 114 39 53 67 8 214 15.11.2023 406, 420, 120B IPC and 24 of Immigration Act 23.11.2023 420 IPC 25.11.2023 420 IPC 23.11.2023 420 IPC 11.04.2019 379, 467, 468, 471, 473, 411, 482, 212 IPC and 25-54-59 of Arms Act Sohana Sadar S.B.S. Nagar Balachaur Balachaur Balongi 20.11.2023 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 City Rajpura IPC 27.01.2024 420 IPC 17.01.2024 420 IPC 26.11.2023 420 IPC 2019 379, 467, 468, 473, 212 IPC City Nawanshahar City Nawanshahar Sadar SBS Nagar Balongi 05.06.2024 406-420 IPC and 24 of IT City Mohali Immigration Act 28.06.2024 406, 420, 466, 471 IPC and 24 of Immigration Act IT City Mohali 10.04.2024 420, 406, 120B IPC 12.06.2024 420, 406,, 120B IPC NRI PS Ambala City 3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows: “….on 10.03.2021 at about 9 to 9:15 PM, the complainant along with his both the sons Gursimran Singh and Amanpreet Singh and wife was present at his home. At that time, one Scorpio, colour black having number plat of AF, came in the street of the complainant. One boy namely Daljit Singh @ Prince S/o Harnam Singh and three other boys namely Sandeep, Ravi and Jimmy alighted from the car, who pushed main gate of house of the complainant with force, broke open inner lock of the gate and entered into the house of the complainant. Daljit Singh @Prince fired two shots from his pistol which hit walls of house of the complainant. They (complainant and his family members) were to enter into their respective rooms out of fear then Daljit Singh @ Prince and his accomplices dragged Amanpreet Singh younger son of the complainant in the street. Those persons while beating Amanrpeet Singh and firing shots with pistol bundled Amanpreet Singh in their Scorpio car and fled away from the spot. The complainant tried to his son Amanpreet Singh and at about 11:15 PM, Amanpreet Singh made phone call from mobile phone of some passerby that Daljit Singh @ Prince, Sandeep, Jimmy, Ravi beat him, caused him injuries and threw him at village Vanie ke, Chogawan road, Amritsar. Therefore, the complainant brought his son Amanrpeet Singh in ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-1725-2025 3 injured condition, had taken docket from the police post and brought Amanpreet Singh to Civil Hospital, Amritsar where his medical examination was conducted. The reason is that Daljit Singh @Prince had a minor altercation with sons of the complainant. Therefore, the above said persons kidnapped son of the complainant, caused him injuries and threw him. Therefore, based on the aforesaid statement, the present case FIR NO. 65 dated 11.03.2021, under Sections 364,365, 452, 323, 427, 336, 34 IPC and 25 Arms Act, Police Station Chheharta, Amritsar was registered by ASI Lakhwinder Kumar.” 4. The petitioner's submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR and even he was not even present at the spot and was not a member of gang which has caused alleged beatings. Counsel further submits that if this Court grants bail the petitioner undertakes to live like a decent human being and shall also surrender fire arm, if any. On instructions, counsel further submits that petitioner shall not repeat the offence and would not involve himself in the offence where sentence prescribed is more than seven years and if he does not, petitioner has no objection if the State files application for cancellation of bail. Counsel also prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 5. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the para 5 of the reply, whichs read as follows: “5. That it is submitted that the victim Amanpreet Singh was medico legally examined at Civil Hospital, Amritsar. The relevant details of his MLR are as under:- S.No. Injuries Marked Injury number 1 Superficial lacerated wound on Yes right parietal region of scalp 4 X 0.3 CM.C/o pain present. No sign of any swelling is seen. No H/O LOC, dizziness, vomiting as per PAT statement. 2 Superficial lacerated wound on Yes right occipital region of scalp 1 x 0.2 cm seen.C/o pain present. No sign of any swelling is seen. No H/o LOC, dizziness, vomiting as per PAT statement. 3 Reddish bruises multiple in Yes ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 3 1 2 3 4 CRM-M-1725-2025 numbers on left shoulder seen 6 X 0.2 cm. C/o pain present. Movements difficulty. H/o clavicle injury present as per PAT statement. Advice X Ray left shoulder AP view Nature of injuries (Simple, grievous, dangerous or pending for observation Injury No.1, 2 simple, injury No.3 KUO Probably duration of injury Within 12 hours Kind of weapon used (Sharp, blunt, firarm, fire, position etc. Blunt all REASONING: 6. 7. Analysis of the above arguments lead to the following outcome. It shall be appropriate to refer to following portion of the reply, which reads as follows:- “ROLE OF THE PETITIONER 17) That it is submitted that the present petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Sam along with other co-accused persons with common and premeditated intention had trespassed into house of the complainant while breaking open bolt of main gate of house of the complainant, they all kidnapped Amanpreet Singh in Scorpio car, beaten him and threw him. The Scorpio car used in commission of crime belonged to the present petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Sam. EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER 18) That it is submitted that the prosecution evidence against the present petitioner-accused Sarabjit Singh @ Sam primarily based on the written statement (FIR) of the complainant Kamaljit Singh and statements of the victim Amanpreet Singh and eye witness Paramjit Kaur which were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. during investigation of this case. Furthermore, the co-accused Daljit Singh @ Prince and Baldev Singh @ Ravi and the present petitioner-accused Sarabjit Singh @ Sam himself made disclosure statements with regard to commission of crime.” 8. Analysis of the above aspects clearly point out that petitioner was named by Paramjit Kaur and his name also came surfaced in the statement of Amanpreet Singh recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Thus, even if the petitioner was initially not named, it ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 4 5 CRM-M-1725-2025 is a settled law that an FIR is not an encyclopedia and at that point of time due to trauma sometime omissions take place. Further petitioner did not mention any reason for false implication and on the other hand, there is massive criminal history. Although petitioner was named by Paramjit Kaur in the statement under Section 161 CrPC and also Amanpreet Singh but the fact that initially in the FIR, a number of people who had alighted from Scorpio were explicitly mentioned namely Daljeet Singh who was accompanied by three other boys namely Sandeep, Ravi and Jimmy, but Sarabjit Singh was not named. It is not a case that there was somebody else in the scorpio and a doubt has been created. Petitioner is stated to be in custody for around 01 year & 09 months, which is more than sufficient. 9. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody which is 01 year, 06 months & 16 days as per custody certificate dated 06.05.2025, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability further pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 10. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage. 11. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 12. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 13. 14.
Legal Reasoning
This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 5 6 CRM-M-1725-2025 15. Given the background of allegations against the petitioner, it becomes paramount to protect the victim, and their family members, as well as the members of society, and incapacitating the accused would be one of the primary options until the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquittal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restriction is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanction]. Given the nature of the allegations and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the petitioner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunition, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fifteen days from release from prison and inform the Investigator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the petitioner shall be entitled to renew and take it back in case of acquittal in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restricting firearms would instill confidence in the victim(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeating the offense. 16. The conditions mentioned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed.” 17. It is clarified that if the petitioner violates any bail condition, the State and/or the victim may file an application for bail cancellation before the trial court, which shall be competent to cancel the bail or add more conditions. Furthermore, if the petitioner moves for deletion or dilution of any bail conditions, the trial court is empowered to do so. 18. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges himself in the offence where sentence is more than seven years, the State might file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 19. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 20. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 6 CRM-M-1725-2025 to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 21. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, 7
Decision
stand disposed of. 19.05.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE ANJU RANI 2025.05.26 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 7