High CourtsSingle Bench

Amandeep Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 26 September 2025 · Citation: (2025) 09 P&H CK 0843

HON’BLE JUDGES
Namit Kumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483 · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 64, 351(2) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 — Section 6
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M Of 6499 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 1,046 words

Namit Kumar, J

1.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.124 dated 18.09.2024 registered under Sections 64 & 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar.

2.

Compliance report dated 20.09.2025 by way of an affidavit of Sh. Kulbir Singh Sandhu, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nangal, District Rupnagar, on behalf of the respondent-State, filed in the Registry is taken on record. As per para 4 of the said report, the complainant/victim and her parents have been informed about the pendency of the present petition and the next date of hearing fixed in the same. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant/victim.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that on 18.09.2024, victim/complainant made a statement before SI Navdeep Kaur to the effect that she is studying in B.A. 1st Year. In the year 2022, her maternal aunt (Maami) came to their house along with her brother Amandeep Singh (the present petitioner). All of them went to Baba Balak Nath temple to pay obeisance. Thereafter, the petitioner and the victim became friends and started talking and meeting to each other. On 13.09.2024, the petitioner called her at Green Villa Lodge, Nangal but she refused. Thereafter, the petitioner started threatening her by saying that in case she will not come to meet him, he will get viral her photographs and videos. Due to fear, she went to meet him at Green Villa Lodge, Nangal, where he had already got reserved one room. He took her inside the room and told her that when she will turned 18 years of age, he will perform marriage with her. He told that he will make all his family agree for their marriage. He made physical relations with her without her consent. He also told her that if she disclose about this to anyone then he will not marry with her. On the basis of the said statement, the instant FIR was registered.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the victim, her father and mother, who have been examined before the Trial Court as PW-1 to PW-3, respectively, have not supported the case of the prosecution. In her testimony recorded before the Trial Court, the victim has stated that in the month of April 2022, her maternal aunt along with the petitioner visited their house at Nangal, District Rupnagar. They all together went to the temple of Baba Balak Nath to pay obeisance. During their visit to the said temple, she had some altercation with the petitioner and the petitioner out of rage, slapped her and threatened to kill her and her family members. Her parents tried to pacify the petitioner, however, he continued to pass threats to her and her family members. Out of fear, she along with her mother went to Police Station Nangal to report the matter and the police officials obtained her signatures and signatures of her mother on the blank papers. She further stated that she suffered the statement before the police as per the instructions and pressure of police officials. She never got recorded her statement before the police that the petitioner threatened her to meet him in the Green Villa Lodge at Nangal on 13.09.2024 and to viral her photographs and videos. The petitioner never made any physical relations with her. In her cross-examination, the victim has stated that she never went to any room with the petitioner and he never did any wrong act with her and never promised to marry her. The petitioner had no photograph or video of her. She never visited hotel Green Villa in her life. She never gave any Aadhar Card to petitioner or in any hotel. She also stated that her medical got conducted due to the police pressure upon her.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 10.10.2024 and he is not involved in any other case. He also submits that investigation in the present case is complete; challan stands presented; charges have been framed and out of total 24 prosecution witnesses, only 07 have been examined so far. The trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude and therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner behind the bars.

6.

Per contra, learned State counsel, while referring to the averments made in the status report, has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he could not refute the factual position that out of total 24 prosecution witnesses, only 07 have been examined so far. He has also filed custody certificate dated 25.09.2025 in the Court which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is behind the bars since more than last eleven months. Custody certificate further shows that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

7.

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

8.

Keeping in view the custody period of the petitioner which is 11 months and 14 days and the facts that the victim, her father and mother have not supported the case of the prosecution before the Trial Court; investigation has been completed; challan has been presented; charges have been framed and out of total 24 prosecution witnesses, only 07 have been examined so far; the petitioner is not involved in any other case and the trial may take a considerable time to conclude, therefore, the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail during trial on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court.

9.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

10.

However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and is meant for the purpose of deciding the present petition only.

11.

Pending application, if any, shall stands disposed of accordingly.