Friday, 12, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Bhupinder Singh @ Rupinder Singh @ Bunty vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 3781 P&H

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3781 P&H
Judgement Date : 24 April, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhupinder Singh @ Rupinder Singh @ Bunty vs State Of Punjab on 24 April, 2026

Author: Rajesh Bhardwaj
Bench: Rajesh Bhardwaj
               CRM-M-2433-2026

               207       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                                            CRM-M-2433-2026
                                                            Date of decision : 24.04.2026

               Bhupinder Singh @ Rupinder Singh @ Bunty                     ....Petitioner

                                                  versus
               State of Punjab                                              .... Respondent

               CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

               Present :-      Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate; Mr. Armaan S. Brar, Advocate &
                               Mr. Bhavnish Kumar Wadhwa, Advocate for the petitioner.

                        Mr. Raj Karan Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.
               RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for

grant of regular bail in case FIR No.271 dated 25.08.2025, under Sections

109, 132, 221, 324(4) of BNS; Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act and Section

21 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Kharar, District SAS Nagar.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the Police party while

on patrolling on 25.08.2025 in search of accused in FIR No.260 dated

18.08.2025 registered under Section 304 of BNS, received a secret

information to the effect that in the area of Majat, the accused is coming

on a motorcycle without any registration number, from the side of

Morinda, with muffled face. At about 12 noon, a youngster with matching

description was seen coming and on seeing the police party, he attempted

to slip away by taking a slip road, however, he fell down. In the meantime,

he took out a pistol from his dub (waist line of trousers) and fired gunshot

towards the police team. The bullet hit the vehicle of the police party and

in self defence, gunshot was fired with the service revolver and the

accused was asked to surrender. However, he fired another gunshot which

missed the police team and eventually, a gunshot was fired to subdue the

accused which hit his right leg and slumped on the ground. The pistol also

CRM-M-2433-2026

fell out from his hand and an electric weighing machine along with a

polythene bag containing intoxicant power also fell out and he was

apprehended. On asking, he disclosed his name to be Bhupinder Singh. He

was suspected to be carrying some contraband and thus, search was

conducted. On conducting the search, 70 grams of Heroin and a pistol 32

bore alongwith 01 live 32 bore cartridge and 02 spent 32 bore cartridge

shells were recovered from his possession. He failed to produce any

license regarding possession of the same and hence, the FIR was

registered and he was arrested on spot. The investigation commenced. On

completion of investigation, challan was presented and on framing of

charges, trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of Learned

Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar praying for grant of bail, however,

finding no merit, the same was declined after hearing both the sides by

Learned trial Court vide order dated 01.12.2025. Aggrieved by the same,

the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing of present petition for

grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended

that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He

submits that the allegations against the petitioner are that he fired at the

police party. He submits that it is the petitioner only who has suffered the

firearm injury and no police official has suffered any injury. He submits

that after the arrest of the petitioner, recovery of 70 grams of heroin along

with one pistol of 32 bore, was planted upon him. He submits that the

false implication of the petitioner is writ large. He submits that the

petitioner is behind bars from the date of his arrest and till date only

charges have been framed and no witness has been examined. He, thus,

submits that the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

CRM-M-2433-2026

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has also opposed the

submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that the there

was secret information about the petitioner. He submits that during the

raid conducted by the police party, the petitioner opened fire on the police

party and in retaliation the police officials also fired in which the

petitioner got injured. He submits that 70 grams of heroin alongwith one

pistol of 32 bore and 01 live cartridge was recovered from the petitioner.

He, on instructions, has submitted that investigation is complete and

charges have been framed. He has produced on record the custody

certificate of the petitioner.

5. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record,

it is deciphered that the allegations against the petitioner are regarding

firing at the police party. The firearm injury, however, is suffered by the

petitioner himself. The alleged recovery of 70 grams of heroin is

admittedly a non-commercial quantity. The custody certificate produced

would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 07 months

and 23 days as on 20.04.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is

involved in 01 more case. As submitted before this Court, investigation is

complete and charges have been framed.

6. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after

conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by

both the parties before the trial Court.

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 and perusing the record, the Court is of the opinion that learned

counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of

bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, present petition is allowed and

CRM-M-2433-2026

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety

bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

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

merits of the case.

8. In case the bail bonds are not furnished by the petitioner

during the period of 07 days from today, then his further custody period

after one week will not be counted in the present case.

24.04.2026 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) ps-I JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter