JAGPREET SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB

Section 25 of the Arms Act, the FIR No. Section 25 of the Arms Act .2025 has been the FIR No.160 dated 13.09.2025 has been lodged in Police Station Ghuman, District lodged in Police Station Since the petitioner is , District Batala. Since the petitioner is GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 2 application for apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case, and the application for apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case, and apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case, and anticipatory bail, filed by the petitioner, anticipatory bail has been dismissed by the learned has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Gurdaspur, vide order dated Additional Sessions Judge .2025, the , vide order dated 08.10.2025, the anticipatory bail by virtue of present petitioner is seeking the benefit of anticipatory bail by virtue of present anticipatory bail by virtue of present petitioner is seeking the benefit of petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by invoking the petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by invoking the petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by invoking the petition. The petitioner is claiming the abovesaid concession by invoking the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the provisions enshrined under Section 482 of the Sanhita, 2023’. Sanhita, 2023

3. rd are that the Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the Briefly stating the facts emerging from reco in view of the statement of Sukhdev abovementioned FIR came into being in view of the statement of Sukhdev in view of the statement of Sukhdev abovementioned FIR came into being It was stated by Singh, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by Singh, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. Singh, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. old complainant that he retired as Captain from the above-named 58-year-old complainant that he retired as Captain from old complainant that he retired as Captain from the above residing in a house situated in the outskirts of the Indian Army, and was residing in a house situated in the outskirts of the residing in a house situated in the outskirts of the Indian Army, and was village. According to complainant, both village. According to complainant, settled abroad. It of his sons were settled abroad. It was further stated by the complainant that on 12.09.2025 at about 10:00- was further stated by the complainant that on 12.09.2025 at about 10:00 was further stated by the complainant that on 12.09.2025 at about 10:00 was further stated by the complainant that on 12.09.2025 at about 10:00 65497 from 11:00 am, he received a WhatsApp call on his mobile No.94176-65497 from 11:00 am, he received a WhatsApp call on his mobile No 11:00 am, he received a WhatsApp call on his mobile No caller demanded a sum mobile No.+32466440268. As per complainant, the caller demanded a sum mobile No.+32466440268. As per complainant, mobile No.+32466440268. As per complainant, of Rs.50 lacs as ransom and threatened that if the abovementioned amount of Rs.50 lacs as ransom and threatened that if the abovementioned amount of Rs.50 lacs as ransom and threatened that if the abovementioned amount of Rs.50 lacs as ransom and threatened that if the abovementioned amount , would was not paid, the complainant, his daughter-in-law and his grandson, would was not paid, the complainant, his daughter was not paid, the complainant, his daughter be harmed. be harmed

4. It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned s the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned statement, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. statement, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. statement, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. statement, formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. According to prosecution, during the course of investigation on the basis of According to prosecution, during the course of investigation on the basis of According to prosecution, during the course of investigation on the basis of According to prosecution, during the course of investigation on the basis of secret information, the accused ‘Ranjit secret information, the accused was arrested on Ranjit Singh’ @Rana was arrested on

19.09.2025, and from his possession one countrymade pistol and a magazine 19.09.2025, and from his possession one countrymade pistol and a magazine 19.09.2025, and from his possession one countrymade pistol and a magazine 19.09.2025, and from his possession one countrymade pistol and a magazine containing one live cartridge were recovered. containing one live cartridge were recovered. containing one live cartridge were recovered. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 3

5. It is further case of the prosecution that during the course of It is further case of the prosecution that during the course of It is further case of the prosecution that during the course of investigation, the above-named accused investigation, the above suffered a disclosure statement, named accused suffered a disclosure statement, wherein he nominated three persons, namely Bhupinder Singh, Jagpreet wherein he nominated three persons, namely Bhupinder Singh, Jagpreet wherein he nominated three persons, namely Bhupinder Singh, Jagpreet wherein he nominated three persons, namely Bhupinder Singh, Jagpreet accused. According Singh (petitioner herein) and Karandeep Singh, as his co-accused. According Singh (petitioner herein) and Karandeep Singh Singh (petitioner herein) and Karandeep Singh to prosecution, in view of abovementioned development, Section 111 of to prosecution, in view of abovementioned development, Section 111 of to prosecution, in view of abovementioned development, Section 111 of to prosecution, in view of abovementioned development, Section 111 of added in the present case on 22.09.2025 and on 23.09.2025 BNS was added in the present case on 22.09.2025 and on 23.09.2025 added in the present case on 22.09.2025 and on 23.09.2025 BNS was accused Bhupinder Singh was arrested. accused Bhupinder Singh was arrested.

7. Heard. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission f crime, and that he is being harassed merely on the basis of a disclosure of crime, and that he is being harassed merely on the basis of a disclosure f crime, and that he is being harassed merely on the basis of a disclosure f crime, and that he is being harassed merely on the basis of a disclosure accused Ranjit Singh @Rana. According to statement, suffered by his co-accused Ranjit Singh @Rana. According to accused Ranjit Singh @Rana. According to statement, suffered by his co learned counsel for the petitioner, the only evidence so far collected by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the only evidence so far collected by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the only evidence so far collected by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the only evidence so far collected by the police against the petitioner is the disclosure statement of co police against the petitioner is accused. As per closure statement of co-accused. As per the abovementioned disclosure statement learned counsel for the petitioner, the abovementioned disclosure statement the abovementioned disclosure statement learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of the fact that it was recorded when co- is inadmissible in evidence in view of the fact that it was recorded when co in view of the fact that it was recorded when co is inadmissible in evidence accused Ranjit Singh was already in police custody. accused Ranjit Singh was already in police custody. accused Ranjit Singh was already in police custody.

8. In addition to above, it has been further contended by learned In addition to above, it has been further contended by learned In addition to above, it has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that neither the mobile phone used for making counsel for the petitioner that neither the mobile phone used for making counsel for the petitioner that neither the mobile phone used for making counsel for the petitioner that neither the mobile phone used for making threatening calls belongs to the petitioner, nor any money was e threatening ver received calls belongs to the petitioner, nor any money was ever received us between the alleged commission by the petitioner, and therefore, any nexus between the alleged commission us between the alleged commission by the petitioner, and therefore, any nex of crime and the petitioner is not established. of crime and the petitioner is not established. of crime and the petitioner is not established.

9. , the learned State Counsel has contended that the , the learned State Counsel has contended that Per contra, the learned State Counsel has contended that petitioner is a part of group involved in the commission of offence of petitioner is a part of group involved in the commission of offence of petitioner is a part of group involved in the commission of offence of petitioner is a part of group involved in the commission of offence of seeking ransom by threatening peace loving citizens. According to learned ransom by threatening peace-loving citizens. According to learned loving citizens. According to learned GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 4 Serviceman, whose State Counsel, the victim in the present case is an Ex-Serviceman, whose State Counsel, the victim in the present case is an Ex State Counsel, the victim in the present case is an Ex children are already settled abroad. As per learned State Counsel, in order to children are already settled abroad. As per learned State Counsel, in order to children are already settled abroad. As per learned State Counsel, in order to children are already settled abroad. As per learned State Counsel, in order to ascertain the role played by the petitioner in the ascertain the role played by the petit commission of crime, his ioner in the commission of crime, his custodial interrogation is necessary in this case. custodial interrogation is necessary in this case. custodial interrogation is necessary in this case.

10. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that otherwise also, the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as the otherwise also, the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as otherwise also, the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as otherwise also, the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as kind of crime vide FIR No.146 dated petitioner is involved in similar kind of crime vide FIR No.146 dated kind of crime vide FIR No.146 dated petitioner is involved , Police Station Ghuman, Police District Batala, District 17.08.2025, Police Station Ghuman, Police District Batala, District , Police Station Ghuman, Police District Batala, District 17.08.2025 As per learned State Counsel, Section 111 of BNS has also been Gurdaspur. As per learned State Counsel, Section 111 of BNS has also been As per learned State Counsel, Section 111 of BNS has also been Gurdaspur. invoked in this case. invoked in this case.

12. The record has been perused carefully. The record has been perused carefully. rusal of record shows that in the present case, the rusal of record shows that in the present case, A perusal of record shows that in the present case, investigation qua petitioner is still at nascent stage, and at this stage, without investigation qua petitioner is still at nascent stage, and at this stage, without investigation qua petitioner is still at nascent stage, and at this stage, without investigation qua petitioner is still at nascent stage, and at this stage, without the role played by the petitioner in custodial interrogation of the petitioner, the role played by the petitioner in the role played by the petitioner in custodial interrogation of the petitioner, the commission of crime cannot be ascerta the commission of crime cannot be ascertained.

13. Here this fact cannot be ignored that of extending threat this fact cannot be ignored that menace of extending threat for demand of ransom is spreading fast in the State of Punjab and the for demand of ransom is in the State of Punjab and the modus operandi involved in the commission of crime is similar adopted by the gang involved in the commission of crime is similar involved in the commission of crime is similar to the modus operandi by the accused in the present case. Since modus operandi adopted by the accused in the present case. Since by the accused in the present case. Since in the without custodial interrogation, the role played by petitioner in the without custodial interrogation, the role played by without custodial interrogation, the role played by commission of crime cannot be unearth, it is hereby held that in the given commission of crime cannot be unearth, it is hereby held that in the given commission of crime cannot be unearth, it is hereby held that in the given commission of crime cannot be unearth, it is hereby held that in the given fact situation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. fact situation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is neces fact situation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is neces

14. It is well settled principles of law that the Court must be principles of law that the Court must be circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it circumspect while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 5 . Rather as per law the abovesaid should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid should not be granted as a matter of rule should not be granted as a matter of rule be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional benefit should extraordinary remedy. circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. circumstances exist

15. With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the With regard to such relief, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the , has Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282 case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282 ed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and ed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and ed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held by any stretch of imagination, be said that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that by any stretch of imagination, be said that bail is a rule, it cannot; anticipatory bail is a rule. anticipatory bail is a rule.

16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above mentioned case has 'ble Supreme Court in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. e the According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when ca According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when ca said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of said power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. justice and may hamper the investigation. justice and may hamper the investigation.

17. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shett y alias Nikita Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an not be granted in a routine manner. As per exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per not be granted in a routine manner. As per exceptional remedy and it ought the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 6

18. Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punjab Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punj In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibba etc. v. State of Punj 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: 1980 SCC (2) 565 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that:- (i) The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of ordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in ordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in exceptional cases only. (ii) In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. power to grant anticipatory bail. Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the (iii) Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim investigating agency or a reasonable claim investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure to secure to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received incriminating material from information likely to be received incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be exercised.

19. not be out of place to mention here that right of It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of not be out of place to mention here that right of custodial interrogation of Investigating Agency is a valuable right custodial interrogation of Investiga and in the ting Agency is a valuable right and in the present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency present case, if such right is den it is likely to ied to the Investigating Agency it is likely to vestigation may not take a proper result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a proper result into miscarriage of justice, as the in result into miscarriage of justice, as the in headway. headway.

20. If the fact-situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of abovementioned principles, abovementioned principles, abovementioned principles, transpires transpires transpires no such exceptional that no such exceptional warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory circumstances, warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory circumstances bail by this Court, exists in the instant case bail by this Court that the case. Thus, it is hereby held that the present petition petition is devoid of merits deserve . Accordingly, the deserves dismissal. Accordingly, the same is hereby hereby dismissed. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-59888 59888-2025(O&M) 8587 7

21. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

22. Since Since Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending the main petition has been dismissed, pending the main petition has been dismissed, pending rendered infructuous. applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. application Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Whether reportable :Yes/No :Yes/No : Yes/No : Yes/No GAURAV THAKUR 2026.01.09 14:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document