Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Bail in Jalandhar Grenade Attack Case, Cites ‘Terror Environment’

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied bail to an individual accused of involvement in a hand grenade attack on the residence of a YouTuber in Jalandhar, citing the creation of a “terror environment.” The court emphasized that the use of explosive devices for such acts renders the offense heinous and instills fear and insecurity among the populace.

The Chenab Times has learned that a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed an appeal filed by Hardik Kamboj seeking bail. The appellant had been in custody for approximately one year, a period the court deemed insufficient to warrant relief, particularly in light of his alleged criminal antecedents.

The prosecution, represented by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), presented a case that on the intervening night of March 15 and 16, 2025, the appellant was allegedly taken by co-accused outside the home of complainant Navdeep Singh, also known as Roger Sandhu. It is alleged that the appellant then hurled a hand grenade towards the balcony of the residence. Fortunately, the grenade did not detonate.

During the proceedings, counsel for the appellant argued that the evidence presented relied on police secret reports and lacked direct proof connecting the appellant to the throwing of the hand grenade. Furthermore, it was contended that the object thrown had not been definitively established as a hand grenade, and only a motorcycle was reportedly recovered during the investigation.

In opposition to the bail plea, the State counsel argued that the use of a hand grenade as a weapon, and its deployment against an individual’s home, indicated a potential breakdown in law and order if not taken seriously. The State maintained that granting bail in such circumstances would be inappropriate.

The Bench, after reviewing the State counsel’s reply, observed that the appellant was identified as one of the primary accused allegedly responsible for throwing the hand grenade. The court noted the appellant’s criminal history, stating that the circumstances did not permit a neutral scrutiny of the evidence regarding its admissibility.

The court further elaborated that the act of throwing a hand grenade on the house of a YouTube influencer, allegedly at the behest of a Pakistan-based rival, underscored the gravity of the offense. The Bench concluded that the use of such an explosive device inherently elevated the act to a heinous crime, fostering an atmosphere of terrorism, fear, and insecurity among the public. Consequently, the court ruled that the applicant was not entitled to bail. The High Court found no infirmity in the lower court’s order rejecting bail and saw no reason to interfere.

An First Information Report (FIR) concerning the incident was registered on March 16, 2025, at a police station in Jalandhar. The FIR invoked provisions related to explosives, arms, and offenses under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The appeal heard by the High Court stemmed from the dismissal of a regular bail application by the Additional Sessions Judge.

---

---

Follow us on

---

(We don't allow anyone to copy content. For Copyright or Use of Content related questions, visit here.)