CRM-M-64911-202 IN THE H (236) BANTU SINGH STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON'B Present: Mr. Mr. R MANISHA BATR 1. The petitioner for gra 29.02.2024 registe Section 25 of Ar District Bathinda. Court on 30.07.20 2. The a recorded by comp on 18.02.2024, he caller while introd and otherwise thre by him on 20.02.2 demand of Rs.15 introduced himsel 2025(O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH NGH Versus
PUNJAB ON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISH Mr. L.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the pe Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The present petition is the secon or grant of regular bail in case aris registered under Sections 384, 386, 3 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Statio hinda. His previous petition was dis .07.2025. The aforementioned FIR was registe complainant Sandeep Singh @ Sherr 24, he received a WhatsApp call from introducing himself as Baljit Mor ra se threatened him with dire consequen 0.02.2024 and the caller while saying Rs.15 lakhs. On 27.02.2024, also a himself as Baljit Mor and told the co JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-64911-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.01.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
NISHA BATRA
the petitioner
Punjab second petition preferred by the se arising out of FIR No.12 dated 386, 387, 506 and 120B of IPC and Station SGN Dev Thermal Plant, as dismissed as withdrawn by this registered on the basis of statement Sherry on 29.02.2024 alleging that ll from an unknown number and the or raised a demand of Rs.15 lakhs sequences. Similar call was received aying that he was Arsh Dala raised a lso a call was received. The caller complainant that on 29.02.2024, M) 2026
the ated and lant, this ment that d the lakhs ived sed a aller 024, AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.29 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-64911-202 the present petitio and asked him to above statement, i was arrested on 01 admitting his in Jaspreet Singh @ the accused Balji receiving the mon stands concluded. 3. It is a falsely implicated Mor had taken his Mor. No ransom any other materia allegations as leve phone was not ev upon him. He has any useful purp fundamental right Each day spent by afresh. The mater are no chances of 4. Status counsel has argue leveled against the 2025(O&M) 2 petitioner and Jaspreet Singh @ Jassi im to give the same. After registrati ent, investigation proceedings were i on 01.03.2024. On interrogation, he is involvement in the crime and als gh @ Jassi used to carry 315 bore coun Baljit Maur for extending threats e money. The co-accused were al luded. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case only on the allegat en his name. He had no connection w nsom call had been made by him. Th aterial to connect the petitioner wit as levelled in the FIR on 27.02.2024 not even in the same vicinity. A fal He has clean antecedents. His further purpose. His prolonged incarce l rights guaranteed under Article 21 ent by him in custody has furnished material witnesses have already been ces of his intimidating them. tatus report and custody certificate h argued that taking into consideration nst the petitioner, he does not deserve Jassi will collect money from him gistration of FIR on the basis of the were initiated. The present petition he suffered disclosure statement nd also, along with the co-accused re country made pistol received from hreats to the complainant and for re also arrested. Investigation now l for the petitioner that he has been llegations that the co-accused Baljit tion with the above-mentioned Baljit im. There is no call detail record or er with the co-accused or with the 2.2024. The location of his mobile A false recovery has been planted urther incarceration would not serve ncarceration militates against the le 21 of the Constitution of India. ished a ground for him to seek bail been examined and, therefore, there icate have been filed. Learned State ration the gravity of the allegations serve to be extended benefit of bail. him f the tition ment used from for now been aljit aljit rd or the ile nted serve the ndia. bail there State tions bail. AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.29 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-64911-202 5. This both the parties at 6. The p threats to the com 01.03.2024. Th subject offences. H 10 months and 22 settled law that the to keep certain fa reasonable ground circumstances whi repeated, the natur the event of conv released on bail, a etc. However, at factor to be consi accused charged w catena of cases tha of time, and the ba filed repeatedly. provide a new c circumstances. Th law prefers bail o requirements of t placed on the obse 2025(O&M) 3 This Court has heard the rival subm ties at considerable length. The petitioner alongwith the co-accus e complainant for ransom. He has bee The allegations prima facie make o nces. However, he has been in custody and 22 days. Trial will obviously take that the Court, while considering an ap tain factors in mind such as whether ground to believe that the accused es which are peculiar to the accused, l e nature and gravity of the accusation, f conviction, the danger of the accu bail, and reasonable apprehension of t er, at the same time, the period of in considered while deciding whether rged with an offence. The Hon’ble A ses that an accused cannot be kept in c the bail application can be considered edly. It has also been held that eve new cause of action for filing a b es. This principle is a part of the broad bail over jail, aiming to balance the s of the criminal justice system. Re e observations made by the Hon’ble A l submissions made by counsel for accused is alleged to have extended as been in continuous custody since make out a case for commission of custody for a period of over 01 year, ly take time to conclude. It is well- an application for grant of bail, has ether there is a prima facie case or cused has committed the offence, used, likelihood of the offence being sation, severity of the punishment in e accused absconding or fleeing if on of the witnesses being threatened, d of incarceration is also a relevant hether bail should be granted to an ’ble Apex Court has observed in a pt in custody for an indefinite period sidered on its own merits even if it is at every day spent in custody can g a bail application under certain e broader approach emphasizing that e the rights of the accused with the m. Reliance in this regard can be n’ble Apex Court in Mohd. Muslim l for nded since n of year, - , has se or ence, eing nt in ng if ned, vant o an in a eriod f it is can rtain that h the n be lim AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.29 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-64911-202 @ Hussain v. Stat observed that the often than not, app are more likely to upon Manmandal (Criminal) No. 86 of Odisha, 2023 S who had been inca was likely to take generally militates Article 21 of the C 7. On an case in the light o petitioner has suff months and 22 day of bail to the petiti petitioner is order surety bonds to Magistrate/Duty M (i) ind fac ma (ii) circ 2025(O&M) 4 . State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC O at the jails are overcrowded and the ot, appalling. The danger of unjustified ely to be hardened rather than reforme ndal and Another v. State of West B o. 8656 of 2023 decided on 14.09.20 23 SCC OnLine SC 110, wherein b en incarcerated for a period of almost o take considerable time. By observin ilitates against the most precious funda f the Constitution. On analyzing the peculiar facts and light of the aforementioned principle as suffered prolonged incarceration for 22 days, this Court is of the opinion th e petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, ordered to be released on bail on f ds to the satisfaction of learned uty Magistrate concerned and on the (i) The petitioner shall not dire inducement, threat or promise to a facts of the case or tamper with th manner whatsoever.
(ii) The petitioner shall not le circumstance without permission of C OnLine SC 352, wherein it was nd their living conditions are, more ustified imprisonment is that inmates eformed. Reliance can also be placed est Bengal, Special Leave Petition 09.2023 and Rabi Prakash v. State rein bail was granted to the accused lmost two to three years and the trial serving that prolonged incarceration s fundamental right guaranteed under ts and circumstances of the present nciples of law, it transpires that the ion for over a period of 01 years, 10 nion that a case is made out for grant ingly, the petition is allowed and the il on furnishing personal as well as earned trial Court/Chief Judicial n the following conditions:-
t directly or indirectly make any se to any person acquainted with the with the evidence of the case in any not leave the country under any sion of the learned trial Court.
t was more ates laced ion ate used trial ation nder esent t the 10 grant d the ll as icial any h the any any AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.29 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-64911-202 (iii hea (iv) resi info (v) num swi (vi) det his 

In the petitioner, it shal application seekin . It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 10. Since any, is rendered in 27.01.2026 Amit Sharma 2025(O&M) 5 (iii) The petitioner shall appear b hearing.
(iv) The petitioner shall provide h residing after release and shall n informing the concerned IO/SHO. (v) The petitioner shall upon his r number to concerned IO/SHO and switched on all times.
(vi) The petitioner shall surrender details of his cell phone and Aadh his mobile number(s) during the pe In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent to seeking cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case.
Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous.
(MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
pear before each and every date of vide his address where he would be shall not change the same without SHO.
n his release give his mobile phone O and shall keep his mobile phone rrender his passport, if any, furnish Aadhar card, and shall not change the pendency of the trial.
y FIR/complaint lodged against the dent to seek redressal by filing an vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
te of ld be thout hone hone rnish ange t the g an y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.29 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.