CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 221 221 221 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Davinder Singh @ Prince State of Punjab CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No registered for the off 148, 149 of the Indian of IPC added later on) 2. petition by the petitioner) is as follows: 2025 2025 2025 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Davinder Singh @ Prince versus Punjab HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Imaan Singh Khara, Advocate Mr. Gurmej Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No registered for the offences punishable under Section 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) of IPC added later on), at Police Station Kotwali Nabha, District Patiala. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows: “This time it is hereby recorded one statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, backside Gurudwara Bora Gate, Nabha by hand ASI Chamkaur Singh 1928/PTA for registering the case under Section 308, 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC, 1860 against Da Singh @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Bakshah, Gaurav and Kamal Bhao and other unknown persons and the same has been received by hand PHG Jugraj Singh 18699 at Police Station and the contents of 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT AT AT AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: August 18 August 18 August 18 August 18, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 ….Petitioner ….Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate and for the petitioner. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.77 dated 04.06.2023, ences punishable under Sections 308, 323, 341, 506, Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) (Sections 325, 201 Kotwali Nabha, District Patiala. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present it is hereby recorded one statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, backside Gurudwara Bora Gate, Nabha by hand ASI Chamkaur Singh 1928/PTA for registering the case under Section 308, 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC, 1860 against Davinder Singh @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Bakshah, Gaurav and Kamal Bhao and other unknown persons and the same has been received by hand PHG Jugraj Singh 18699 at Police Station and the contents of the same are as: 1111 2025 2025 2025 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 Petitioner ….Respondent 483 of the for grant of , 308, 323, 341, 506, (Sections 325, 201 The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present it is hereby recorded one statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, backside Gurudwara Bora Gate, Nabha by hand ASI Chamkaur Singh 1928/PTA for registering the case vinder Singh @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Bakshah, Gaurav and Kamal Bhao and other unknown persons and the same has been received by hand PHG Jugraj the same are as: MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 pump gave the blow of the same upon my left arm and while I was lying pump. All the abovesaid persons were saying that today we will not left 3. has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question that the petitioner and the complainant are neighbourers has iterated counsel has further is taken to be correct, vital part of the 2025 2025 2025 2025 Statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, Gurudwara backside Bora Gate, Nabha, aged about 43 years, mobile no. 96460- 31310 stated that I am the resident of abovesaid address and I am doing the work of fruits and flowers near main road of PWD Rest House Nabha. On dated 02.06.2023, at 9 p.m. me and my friend Bony son of Ved Parkash and Ladi son of Amarjit, residents of Bora Gate, Nabha were drinking cold drink in the Tavern which is located at Cinema Road, Nabha and in the meantime, Davinder @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Badshah, Gaurva, Kamal Bhao and other unknown persons entered in the Tavern inside they started beating me and my friend L and my other friend Bony was caught hold by Badshah and Kamal Bhao and they took him at the godown of FCI after beating him and I got afraid from them and came out from the Tavern and ran towards the Mehas Gate side and then they caught hold me in the front of shop of Sharma Ice cream and they again started beating me. Davinder @Prince gave two blow of iron datt upon my head and due to the same the blood start oozing out from my head and I fell down on the floor and while I was l Davinder @ Prince gave many blows of iron handle of water pump upon my right leg and Resham who was having handle of water pump in his hand gave the blow of the same upon my head and back. Garuav resident of Toba Basti, Duladi Gate, Nabha who was pump gave the blow of the same upon my left arm and while I was lying down and the abovesaid persons beaten me with the handle of water pump. All the abovesaid persons were saying that today we will not left him and thereafter I got unconscious and then the abovesaid persons left me on the spot and fled away from the spot with their weapons and then my friend Bony came there and he took me and got me admitted at Civil Hospital, Nabha for treatment and there the doctor sahib after stitches upon my head referred me to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala and there my treatment is going on. Abovesaid Davinder @ Prince and Resham are my neighbourer and they used to come in my with them. However, the abovesaid persons without any enmity beaten me. I have threat to my life from the abovesaid persons. Legal action be taken against the abovesaid persons. Today I have got recorded my statement in the presence of my father. The statement is read and heard and the same is correct.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question that the petitioner and the complainant are neighbourers that the petitioner is in custody since further iterated that assuming arguendo to be correct, the petitioner has not been attributed any vital part of the body of the victim. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 2222 Statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, Gurudwara backside Bora Gate, Nabha, aged about 43 years, mobile no. 31310 stated that I am the resident of abovesaid address and I am nd flowers near main road of PWD Rest House Nabha. On dated 02.06.2023, at 9 p.m. me and my friend Bony son of Ved Parkash and Ladi son of Amarjit, residents of Bora Gate, Nabha were drinking cold drink in the Tavern which is located at Cinema Road, Nabha and in the meantime, Davinder @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Badshah, Gaurva, Kamal Bhao and other unknown persons entered in the Tavern and after coming inside they started beating me and my friend Ladi fled away from the spot and my other friend Bony was caught hold by Badshah and Kamal Bhao and they took him at the godown of FCI after beating him and I got afraid from them and came out from the Tavern and ran towards the Mehas Gate y caught hold me in the front of shop of Sharma Ice- cream and they again started beating me. Davinder @Prince gave two blow of iron datt upon my head and due to the same the blood start oozing out from my head and I fell down on the floor and while I was lying down Davinder @ Prince gave many blows of iron handle of water pump upon my right leg and Resham who was having handle of water pump in his hand gave the blow of the same upon my head and back. Garuav resident of Toba Basti, Duladi Gate, Nabha who was armed with handle of water pump gave the blow of the same upon my left arm and while I was lying down and the abovesaid persons beaten me with the handle of water pump. All the abovesaid persons were saying that today we will not left got unconscious and then the abovesaid persons left me on the spot and fled away from the spot with their weapons and then my friend Bony came there and he took me and got me admitted at Civil Hospital, Nabha for treatment and there the doctor sahib after providing stitches upon my head referred me to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala and there my treatment is going on. Abovesaid Davinder @ Prince and Resham are my neighbourer and they used to come in my house and I have no enmity d persons without any enmity beaten me. I have threat to my life from the abovesaid persons. Legal action be taken against the abovesaid persons. Today I have got recorded my statement in the presence of my father. The statement is read and heard Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question on account of the fact that the petitioner and the complainant are neighbourers. Learned counsel the petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2024. Learned arguendo, the prosecution version the petitioner has not been attributed any injury on Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 2222 Statement of Dimple Sidhu son of Sohan Singh, resident of Prem Nagar, Gurudwara backside Bora Gate, Nabha, aged about 43 years, mobile no. 31310 stated that I am the resident of abovesaid address and I am nd flowers near main road of PWD Rest House Nabha. On dated 02.06.2023, at 9 p.m. me and my friend Bony son of Ved Parkash and Ladi son of Amarjit, residents of Bora Gate, Nabha were drinking cold drink in the Tavern which is located at Cinema Road, Nabha and in the meantime, Davinder @ Prince, Resham sons of Babli, resident of Prem Nagar, Bora Gate, Nabha, Lovely Bhao, Badshah, Gaurva, Kamal and after coming adi fled away from the spot and my other friend Bony was caught hold by Badshah and Kamal Bhao and they took him at the godown of FCI after beating him and I got afraid from them and came out from the Tavern and ran towards the Mehas Gate - cream and they again started beating me. Davinder @Prince gave two blow of iron datt upon my head and due to the same the blood start oozing ying down Davinder @ Prince gave many blows of iron handle of water pump upon my right leg and Resham who was having handle of water pump in his hand gave the blow of the same upon my head and back. Garuav resident armed with handle of water pump gave the blow of the same upon my left arm and while I was lying down and the abovesaid persons beaten me with the handle of water pump. All the abovesaid persons were saying that today we will not left got unconscious and then the abovesaid persons left me on the spot and fled away from the spot with their weapons and then my friend Bony came there and he took me and got me admitted at Civil providing stitches upon my head referred me to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala and there my treatment is going on. Abovesaid Davinder @ Prince and Resham are house and I have no enmity d persons without any enmity beaten me. I have threat to my life from the abovesaid persons. Legal action be taken against the abovesaid persons. Today I have got recorded my statement in the presence of my father. The statement is read and heard that the petitioner on account of the fact Learned counsel . Learned , the prosecution version on MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 4. arguing that the allegations raised and, thus, he State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated in Court, which is taken on record. 5. the available records of the case. 6. whereinafter, investigation was presented on cited, but none has Bar give shall be deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1. of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 2025 2025 2025 2025 Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated in Court, which is taken on record. I have heard counsel for the rival the available records of the case. The present petitioner was whereinafter, investigation qua him was carried out and the challan was presented on 18.03.2024. Total 20 prosecution witnesses have been none has been examined till date. shall be gone into during course of deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. At this juncture, it would be apposite to of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 “18. Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. This humanist fundamental is ofte delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may be social and economic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the 3333 Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by against the petitioner are serious in nature does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 16.08.2025 rival parties and have gone through he present petitioner was arrested on 07.03.2024, was carried out and the challan qua him prosecution witnesses have been . The rival contentions raised at during course of the trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein a judgment Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of State of State of State of Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494 Maharashtra and anothers, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494, which reads thus: Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. This humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may conomic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the 3333 by are serious in nature Learned 2025 parties and have gone through , qua him prosecution witnesses have been contentions raised at trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or refer herein a judgment State of State of State of State of Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond n missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may conomic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 6.2. State counsel, the of 01 year, 05 months & 08 days. the petitioner is stated to be involved in factum cannot be a ground sufficient by i regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can b upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Court in CRM 2025 2025 2025 2025 manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with indigence or other privations. 19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime. 20. We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a convict. The over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be. 21. We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as well as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article 21 of the Constitution.” As per custody certificate dated State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period 01 year, 05 months & 08 days. Further, as per the said custody certificate the petitioner is stated to be involved in multiple factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can b upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Cri Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 minal) 477 minal) 477 minal) 477 Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as 4444 manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a g postulate of criminal jurisprudence that accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be. We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article As per custody certificate dated 16.08.2025 filed by the learned petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period Further, as per the said custody certificate multiple cases/FIRs. However, this tself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of minal) 477 minal) 477 minal) 477 minal) 477 & judgments of this 2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of 4444 manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a g postulate of criminal jurisprudence that accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article .08.2025 filed by the learned petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period Further, as per the said custody certificate cases/FIRs. However, this tself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the e placed Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir Maulana Mohd. Amir ; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of & judgments of this Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of Akhilesh Singh v. State of MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. undertrial is not warranted in the facts 7. ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing the satisfaction of the Ld. addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: 8. which may be imposed by concerned hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. 2025 2025 2025 2025 , decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. RCR (Criminal) 191. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing the satisfaction of the Ld. Concerned CJM addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit a bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell permission of the CJM/ Duty (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try t trial. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the Ordered accordingly. 5555 Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an and circumstances of the case. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM /Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: r shall not mis-use the liberty granted. The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior CJM/ Duty Magistrate. The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those CJM/ Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the 5555 Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is bail/surety bonds to /Duty Magistrate. However, in /Duty The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before ny offence while on The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station phone number without prior o delay the In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----450 450 450 450----2025 2025 2025 2025 10. opinion on the merits of the case. 11. application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. August 18 August 18 August 18 August 18, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 2025 2025 2025 2025 Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No 6666 Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE 6666 expression of Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.08.18 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment