BNSS, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.138 dated 25.09.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar, under Sections 279/337/338 IPC (now und 2023) and Sections 307/302 IPC (now 109 and 103 of BNS, 2023). 2. custody for alleges false implication on account of the fact that he had lodged FIR No.8 dated 12.10.2016, under Section 7/13 PC Act, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, he now stands conv Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.138 dated 25.09.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar, under Sections 279/337/338 IPC (now und 2023) and Sections 307/302 IPC (now 109 and 103 of BNS, 2023). Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 5 years and about 2 months. He was not named in the FIR and alleges false implication on account of the fact that he had lodged FIR No.8 dated 12.10.2016, under Section 7/13 PC Act, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, against one ASI Kulwinder Singh, wherein he now stands convicted for 5 years, vide judgment dated 21.11.2023. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.138 dated 25.09.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar, under Sections 279/337/338 IPC (now under Sections 281, 125 of BNS, 2023) and Sections 307/302 IPC (now 109 and 103 of BNS, 2023). Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in He was not named in the FIR and alleges false implication on account of the fact that he had lodged FIR No.8 dated 12.10.2016, under Section 7/13 PC Act, Police Station against one ASI Kulwinder Singh, wherein icted for 5 years, vide judgment dated 21.11.2023. icted for 5 years, vide judgment dated 21.11.2023. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.09 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. Further that, none of the vehicles mentioned in the FIR was in his ownership. Injured-PW 1 Ashish Kumar has been re-examined after his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was allowed. Charges have been framed on 11.11.2022, however, only 6 PWs stand examined and there are still 15 more to go. He is suffering from spinal injury and has been treated in the hospital. He is not involved in any other similar case, but for 1 under the NDPS Act, wherein he is on bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having actively participated in the commission of offence. However, she is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner being on bail in another case. 4. Heard. 5. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi (Supra)had held that, “As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court, etc.” 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 5 years, 1 month and PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.09 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 30 days; on bail in other case; charges stand framed on 11.11.2022, but out of 21 PWs, only 6 have been examined; the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed. 7. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court. (viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.09 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. (ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner. 8. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order. 9. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.09 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.