Niacourt In Mohali Rejects Accused S Third Bail Plea

A Mohali court has dismissed the bail application of Pargat Singh, an accused in the 2018 Khalistan Referendum conspiracy case being investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), holding that he had failed to show any substantial change in circumstances since the rejection of his earlier bail pleas.

Special NIA judge Dinesh Kumar Wadhwa observed that successive bail applications can be entertained only when there was a significant change in circumstances and not on the basis of “mere cosmetic variations”.

The court held that the grant of bail to some co-accused did not amount to a fresh ground warranting reconsideration of Pargat Singh’s case, particularly when his appeal seeking bail had already been dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana high court earlier this year.

According to the prosecution, the case originated on October 19, 2018, when the Amritsar police arrested two men, Sukhraj Singh, alias Raju, and Malkeet Singh, alias Meetu, while they were allegedly putting up banners carrying slogans such as “Khalistan Zindabad” and “Khalistan Referendum 2020” on pillars of the Kot Mit Singh flyover in Amritsar. Following the arrests, Punjab Police registered an FIR under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code relating to sedition, promoting enmity and criminal conspiracy.

The NIA arrested Pargat on June 22, 2020. The agency alleged that he was a member of a terrorist gang formed by Gurpatwant Singh Pannun of the banned outfit Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) and had acted under the directions of Nihal Singh, alias Fateh Singh, described by investigators as a “key operative” involved in promoting the “Punjab Referendum 2020” campaign.

The agency claimed that Pargat recruited co-accused Sukhraj Singh and facilitated his communication with Nihal Singh. According to investigation, he directed Sukhraj to collect stencils carrying “Khalistan Zindabad Referendum 2020” slogans, which were later used to make impressions at various locations in Amritsar.

The NIA further alleged that Pargat himself painted similar slogans on the walls of a government school and a waterworks facility in his native village of Tarmala, photographed and recorded the graffiti, and forwarded the material to SFJ operatives.

Investigators also alleged that he received funds through SFJ-linked channels from South Africa, routed through operatives associated with the organisation and collected through financial institutions in Malout and Abohar.

Seeking bail, Pargat’s counsel argued that the accused was innocent, had been falsely implicated and was not named in the original FIR. The defence submitted that he had spent nearly six years in custody, the investigation had been completed, the chargesheet had already been filed and charges framed, and the trial was likely to take considerable time to conclude.

The defence also cited “bails granted to five co-accused by the high court” as a changed circumstance, justifying fresh consideration of his plea.

Opposing the application, the NIA contended that the bail plea was barred under Section 43D (5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and that no material change had occurred since the dismissal of the accused’s earlier bail applications.

The agency pointed out that both the trial court and the high court had previously declined to grant him bail after considering the merits of the case.

While dismissing the plea, the court noted that Pargat’s first bail application had been rejected in December 2021 and his second in October 2024. His subsequent appeal before the high court was also dismissed on February 12, 2026. Under these circumstances, the court held that the accused had failed to establish any fresh grounds for relief.

“The mere fact that other co-accused have been granted bail is no ground to maintain the third bail application,” the court observed, adding that there was no substantial change in circumstances since the previous orders.