Why Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to man accused of hoisting Khalistani flag in Moga

Observing that “further pre-trial incarceration would cause grave injustice” and that the custody period had become “excessive for the purpose of pre-trial detention,” the Punjab and Haryana High Court said on April 1, “Considering the entire facts and the pre-trial custody, which on the face of it, is excessive for the purpose of pre-trial custody and the undertaking given by the appellant through counsel, we are of the considered opinion that his further custody is not required.”

Liberty versus seriousness of charges

• While acknowledging the grave nature of the allegations, the Punjab and Haryana High Court relied on settled principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding prolonged incarceration and the right to personal liberty.
• The bench noted that although offences under the UAPA are serious, courts must also consider whether continued detention without timely trial would amount to a violation of Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.
• The Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that the period already spent in custody was substantial and that further incarceration would not serve the interests of justice.
• The court said that the case warranted bail without commenting on the merits, while balancing the seriousness of allegations with the accused’s fundamental right to a speedy trial.

Justices Anoop Chitkara and Sukhvinder Kaur observed that the period already spent in custody was substantial and that further incarceration would not serve the interests of justice.

Bail granted with conditions

• Allowing the appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered that the accused be released on bail subject to conditions, including furnishing a bond of Rs 1 lakh and compliance with restrictions imposed by the trial court.
• The court also recorded the undertaking given by the accused that he would not indulge in any activities against the nation and would remain within the limits of lawful expression under Article 19 (protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc).
• It clarified that the state would be free to seek cancellation of bail if any conditions were violated or if the accused committed any further offence.

Khalistani flag hoisted, Tricolour desecrated

• The case dates back to August 14, 2020, when two men allegedly entered the deputy commissioner’s office complex in Moga early in the morning and climbed to the top floor, where they hoisted a saffron flag bearing the word “Khalistan.”
• According to investigators, the accused then descended and targeted the Indian national flag within the premises.
• They allegedly cut the rope holding the Tricolour, causing it to fall, and dragged it across the ground before fleeing.
• The incident, which occurred just a day before Independence Day, triggered immediate outrage and led to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) by the Punjab Police the same day.

NIA steps in, UAPA invoked

• Given the nature of the allegations and their potential link to secessionist activity, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs handed over the probe to the NIA on September 4, 2020.
• The NIA subsequently re-registered the case under stringent provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including sedition and waging war against the state, along with sections of the UAPA.
• The agency alleged that the act was part of a broader conspiracy driven by the Sikhs for Justice, which had been declared an unlawful association in July 2019.
• It claimed that SFJ’s handler, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, had circulated videos urging youth to hoist Khalistani flags at government buildings in exchange for cash rewards.

Role attributed to accused

• Akashdeep Singh Badhan, also known as Munna, was accused of aiding the main conspirators by recording videos of the flag-hoisting and facilitating the dissemination of the footage.
• The NIA alleged that he had been influenced by online propaganda and had registered for the “Referendum 2020” campaign advocating a separate Khalistan.
• Digital material retrieved from his phone allegedly included Khalistani propaganda videos and related content.
• Investigators further claimed that after the incident, the accused and his co-conspirators tore the national flag, stamped on it, and raised slogans such as “Khalistan Zindabad,” recording the acts on mobile phones, before sharing the videos.

Bail denied earlier

• The initial plea of the accused for regular bail was rejected by a special NIA court in Mohali on December 8, 2025, prompting him to approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court under Section 21 (appeals) of the NIA Act.
• By then, he had already spent over five years and six months in custody as an undertrial prisoner.
• His counsel argued that the prolonged detention, coupled with delays in trial, violated his constitutional right to a speedy trial.
• The defence also assured the court that the accused would not engage in any unlawful or anti-national activities if released on bail.

Trial yet to conclude

• The trial in the case is still ongoing, with multiple witnesses yet to be examined.
• The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order, meanwhile, ensures that while the accused is released from prolonged pre-trial detention, he will continue to face prosecution in accordance with law.
• The ruling once again brings into focus the judiciary’s delicate role in balancing national security concerns arising from alleged secessionist acts with the constitutional mandate to protect individual liberty and ensure a fair and timely trial.