CRM-M-52856 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 217 Lovepreet Singh @ Labha State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : Mr. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. AMAN CHAUDHARY 1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. registered under Section Station Kathunagal, District Amritsar. 2. Learned counsel contends that 08.08.2021 and granted bail on 07.01.2021. He had absented due to noting down the wrong date, however, surrendered on 17.02.2025 since then. His name surfaced based on the disclosure statement of the co No recovery has b relies on the order passed by Co @ Gogi vs. State of Haryana wherein the accused, who was implicate no recovery had been effected fro 52856-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Lovepreet Singh @ Labha Versus HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Mr. Gursimran Singh Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition filed under Section of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. registered under Sections 304, 201 IPC and 61/1/14 of the Excise Act, Kathunagal, District Amritsar. Learned counsel contends that 08.08.2021 and granted bail on 07.01.2021. He had absented due to noting down the wrong date, however, surrendered on 17.02.2025 . His name surfaced based on the disclosure statement of the co No recovery has been effected from him. He is not involved in any other case. relies on the order passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in @ Gogi vs. State of Haryana in CRM-M-24505 wherein the accused, who was implicated on the basis of disclosure statement and no recovery had been effected from him, was granted bail, after being in custody -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-52856-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.09.2025 ... Petitioner ... Respondent AMAN CHAUDHARY , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.195 dated 07.08.2020 s 304, 201 IPC and 61/1/14 of the Excise Act, at Police Learned counsel contends that the petitioner was arrested 08.08.2021 and granted bail on 07.01.2021. He had absented due to noting down the wrong date, however, surrendered on 17.02.2025 and has been in custody . His name surfaced based on the disclosure statement of the co-accused. He is not involved in any other case. ordinate Bench of this Court in Sandeep Kumar 24505-2022 decided on 07.12.2022, the basis of disclosure statement and m him, was granted bail, after being in custody 2025 (O&M) 2025 483 BNSS, 2023, is 07.08.2020, at Police the petitioner was arrested on 08.08.2021 and granted bail on 07.01.2021. He had absented due to noting down and has been in custody accused. He is not involved in any other case. He Sandeep Kumar 2022 decided on 07.12.2022, the basis of disclosure statement and m him, was granted bail, after being in custody ASHOK KUMAR 2025.09.24 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-52856-2025 -2- for almost 9 months. Challan stands presented on 07.10.2020, charges were framed on 08.10.2021, only 1, out of 18 prosecution witnesses, has been examined. 3. The custody certificate dated 23.09.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 1 year and 5 days. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and petitioner being not involved in any other case. 5. Heard. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for last 1 year and 5 days; not involved in any other case; though charges have been framed on 08.10.2021, however, out of 18 prosecution witnesses, only 1 has been examined so far, 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. ASHOK KUMAR 2025.09.24 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-52856-2025 -3- (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. (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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) 24.09.2025 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ASHOK KUMAR 2025.09.24 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document