CRM-M/40707/2026 of JOGRAJ SINGH ALIAS KALU Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 2 September 2026

1. CRM-M-40707-2026 (O&M) JOGRAJ SINGH ALIAS KALU ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB

... RESPONDENT CRM-M-47984-2026 (O&M) CHARLES MASIH @ BITTA ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB

... RESPONDENT

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-40707-2026. Mr. Dhawaljeet Dutta, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-47984-2026. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

1. By way of common order, CRM-M-40707-2026 and CRM-M- 47984-2026 are being decided as both are arising out of the same FIR. For the sake of ‘brevity’, the facts are being taken from CRM-M-40707-2026.

2. Petitioner - Jograj Singh @ Kalu is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (U/s 439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No. 161 dated 15.12.2025, registered under Sections 308(5), 326(F), 61(2), 111 of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Majitha, District JANKI BHATT

Amritsar Rural and petitioner - Charles Masih @ Bitta is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (U/s 439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No. 161 dated 15.12.2025, registered under Sections 3 and 4 of Explosive Act, 1980, 308(5), 326, 61(2), 111 of BNS, 2023 and Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar Rural.

3. The case of the prosecution is that FIR in the present case was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Kawaljit Singh to the effect that he is doing the business of sale and purchase of old vehicles and he has a restaurant at Sohian Road, where he used to park the vehicles and other goods and he had deputed a security guard, namely, Davinder Singh at that place. On 14.12.2025, complainant was present in his house where Security Guard Davinder Singh came and informed the complainant that 6 unidentified persons, who came on two motorcycles, set two vehicles belonging to the complainant on fire. Complainant also informed to the police that on 21.10.2025 he received a threat call of extortion of Rs.50,00,000/- and he has firm belief that present occurrence was committed by those unknown persons who demanded ransom of Rs.50,00,000/- from him

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Petitioner - Jograj Singh @ Kalu has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Gurpreet Singh and name of petitioner - Charles Masih @ Bitta has emerged on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant. The petitioners are not named in the FIR and no recovery has been effected from them. He further submits that petitioner - Jograj Singh JANKI BHATT

@ Kalu is in custody for the last 08 months and 08 days and petitioner - Charles Masih @ Bitta is in custody for the last 07 months and 22 days. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Notice of motion.

6. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioners on the ground of gravity of allegations. He has filed the custody certificates in the Court today and the same are taken on record. As per the custody certificate, petitioner - Jograj Singh @ Kalu is in custody for the last 08 months and 08 days and petitioner - Charles Masih @ Bitta is in custody for the last 07 months and 22 days.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that petitioners are not named in the FIR and no recovery has been effected from them; they are in custody for more than 07 months and 22 days; the trial is likely to take time and continuous detention of the petitioners would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners during the pendency of the trial. Moreover, ‘bail is the rule and jail is the exception’.

9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial JANKI BHATT

Magistrate concerned.

10. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

11. It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order, if the petitioners are found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of their bail.

12. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(H.S.GREWAL) 02.09.2026

JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No JANKI BHATT