Sarabjit Singh Alias Sarbu vs State Of Punjab

Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
232 Date of Decision: 02.11.2026.
(1) CRM-M-38510-2026
Onkar Singh ....Petitioner.
VERSUS
State of Punjab ....Respondent.
WITH
(2) CRM-M-55693-2026
Gurleen Kaur ....Petitioner.
VERSUS
State of Punjab ....Respondent.
AND
(3) CRM-M-59034-2026
Sarabjit Singh @ Sarbu ....Petitioner.
VERSUS
State of Punjab ....Respondent.
*
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
---
Present: Mr. Salinder Kumar Saini, Advocate and
Mr. Amandeep Singh Gill, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM-M-38510-2026).
Mr. Shivender, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM-M-55693-2026)
Mr. Arshdeep Singh Brar, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM-M-59034-2026).
Mr. Gurpartap Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 2
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. Petitioner-Onkar Singh, aged about 36 years, has filed petition
(CRM-M-38510-2026) under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail
in case FIR No.04 dated 03.01.2026 under Sections 103, 61(2), 324(4) of
BNS and Sections 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station
Dharamkot, District Moga.
Petitioner-Gurleen Kaur, aged 22 years, has filed petition (CRM-
M-55693-2026) under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail in case
FIR No.04 dated 03.01.2026 under Sections 103, 61(2), 324(4) of BNS and
Section 25 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Dharamkot, District
Moga.
Petitioner-Sarabjit Singh @ Sarbu, aged 35 years, has filed
petition (CRM-M-59034-2026) under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, seeking
regular bail in case FIR No.04 dated 03.01.2026 under Sections 103, 61(2),
324(4) of BNS and Section 25 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station
Dharamkot, District Moga.
2. For the incident, which happened at about 6:40 AM on
03.01.2026, complainant-Gurwinder Singh got registered the FIR, which
reads as under:-
“Brief facts of the present case are that present FIR has
been lodged on the basis of statement of complainant Gurwinder
Singh son of Bhajan Singh wherein he has stated that he is
working at Nestle Factory, Moga. They are three brothers, the
eldest one is Jasvir Singh, then Umarsir Singh younger than him,
and he is the youngest. His brother Umarsir Singh was the
President at Nestle Factory, Moga. He used to go to Nestle
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 3
Factory, Moga every day in the morning around 6:30-7:00 AM
in his car. In morning around 6:40 AM, his brother Umarsir
Singh got into his Swift Dzire car number PB-04-Z-9800 to go to
Nestle Factory, Moga. He and his cousin namely Baljinder Singh
son of Jasmail Singh also set off on his Splendor motorcycle
number PB76-A-7601 to go to Moga, following right behind his
car. When car of Umarsir Singh reached near the gate of the
Government High School, Bhinder Kalan, suddenly a black-
colored car came from the front, whose driver deliberately struck
his car into his brother's car, causing significant damage to it.
Then 3-4 young person got out of the black car, each holding two
pistols. These known individuals immediately started firing
towards the car of his brother Umarsir Singh. Among these
firing persons, he and his companion Baljinder Singh recognized
Manpreet Singh alias Mannu son of unknown, from Bughipura,
and Bhinda Singh, son of Kewal Singh residents of Bhinder
Khurd, from the front. These two known persons, along with two
other unknown persons got back into the black car and fled away
after shooting at his brother Umarsir Singh. Upon seeing this
incident from their side, they boarded the car and escaped
towards village Jalalabad side. When they reached near his
brother Umarsir Singh, they saw he had been hit by many bullets
and was lying smear with blood on the driver's seat of the car
and had died on the spot due to the gunshot wounds. The motive
behind the occurrence was that Inderpal Singh of their village
had threatened his brother Umarsir Singh during the election of
Sarpanch to field his candidate and during the block samiti
votes, his brother Umarsir Singh had fielded Veerpal Kaur wife
of Dharamvir Singh, who won the election and said Inderpal
Singh started holding a grudge against them. Inderpal Singh
Sarpanch, Govinda son of Binda Singh residents of village
Bhinder Kalan alongwith Manpreet Singh alias Mani son of
Boota Singh and Gagandeep Singh alias Laden son of Kewal
Singh residents of village Bhinder Khurd (presently residing in
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 4
USA) conspired with them and in pre planned manner, they got
conducted the racky of his brother Umarsir Singh through
Balkar Singh son of Pappu resident of Bhinder Khurd and
committed the murder of his brother through Manpreet Singh
alias Mannu and Bhinda Singh and two unknown person. They
can also identify the two unknown persons and if they came in
front of them.”
After registration of the FIR, petitioner-Onkar Singh was
nominated as accused in the present case vide Rapat No.10 dated 11.01.2026
and thus was arrested also the same day.
At the time of incident, deceased had left the home in his Swift
Dzire car No.PB-04Z-9800 for going to Nestle Factory in Moga. Complainant
and his cousin brother Baljinder Singh also left home on complainant’s
motorcycle No.PB-76A-7601 to go to Moga.
When car of Umarsher Singh reached near gate of Government
High School, Bhinder Kalan, one black coloured car came from the backside
and deliberately hit the car of Umersher Singh. Thereafter, 3-4 boys came out
of the car holding two pistols in their hands and immediately started firing at
the car of the complainant’s brother. Complaint’s friend Baljinder Singh
identified two of the accused as Manpreet Singh @ Mannu of village Bhinder
Khurd and Bhinder s/o Kewal Singh of village Jalalabad. Thus, Umarsher
Singh suffered bullet injuries while he was on the driver seat of the car and
thereafter died on spot.
Motive for committing the crime was explained that one Inderpal
Singh of the complainant’s village had earlier threatened deceased Umersher
Singh and the complainant-party during election for the post of Sarpanch to
not to field any candidate. However, during Block Samiti elections, deceased
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 5
Umersher Singh fielded Veerpal Kaur and she had won the election and
thereupon Inderpal Singh had developed grudge against the complainant-
party.
Complainant further alleged that Sarpanch Inderpal Singh,
Govinda along with Manpreet Singh @ Mannu and Gagandeep Singh @
Laden, who both are living in USA had hatched the deep rooted conspiracy to
kill Umersher Singh by getting the recce conducted through accused Balkar
Singh. Thus, there are total eight accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) argue that petitioners are
falsely implicated in the present case as they have nothing to do with the
incident in question. Names of the petitioners is not there in the FIR nor any
allegation is detailed of playing any vital role in committing the incident.
None of the petitioners were present at the spot of incident nor any specific
role is detailed except of involvement on the basis of disclosure statement.
Only allegation against petitioner-Onkar Singh is of getting the car recovered,
which was allegedly used in the commission of the crime. Counsel for
petitioner-Onkar Singh argues that in FIR, no registration number of the car
or even its make/model is mentioned. In fact, it was a blind murder case and
on the basis of suspicion though by naming two of them (Manpreet Singh @
Mannu and Bhinder Singh), false FIR is got registered. Petitioners have clear
antecedents, having no connectivity with the accused party. Except of the
disclosure statement/ secret information, no other conclusive evidence could
be collected during the course of investigation regard the role allegedly
played by the petitioners. Petitioner-Sarabjit Singh @ Sarbu is not named in
the FIR. His involvement is based upon extrajudicial confession before one
Balwant Singh, which was recorded after a period of two months of the
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 6
incident. Counsel for petitioner-Sarabjit Singh @ Sarbu argues that Balwant
Singh is not well reputed or a known personality in the village, before whom
the petitioner would go and may confess for his guilt. Thus, there is no direct
evidence against him. Petitioner-Onkar Singh is inside jail since 11.01.2026,
petitioner-Gurleen Kaur is inside jail since 21.03.2026 and petitioner-Sarabjit
Singh @ Sarbu is inside jail since 27.03.2026.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel filed custody
certificates, which are taken on record. Registry to tag the same at an
appropriate place.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned respective
counsels for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering all the facts and circumstances noticed hereabove
and that petitioner-Onkar Singh is inside jail since 11.01.2026, petitioner-
Gurleen Kaur is inside jail since 21.03.2026 and petitioner-Sarabjit Singh @
Sarbu is inside jail since 27.03.2026 and conclusion of the trial will consume
considerable time, petitions are worth to be allowed . Ordered accordingly.
Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, subject to their furnishing bail/
surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial
Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in
any other case.
7. Any of the discussion done and recorded hereabove, shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial
Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the
basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible in
accordance with law.
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document

CRM-M-38510, 55693 and 59034-2026 (O&M) 7
8. It is further made clear that if, in future, the petitioners are found
to be directly involved in similar activities, the prosecution would be at liberty
to seek cancellation of bail.
9. Petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
10. Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected files.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of
accordingly.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
02.11.2026
jitender
Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No
Whether Reportable : Yes/ No
JITENDER
2026.11.03 09:50
I attest to the accuracy
of this document