KARAN KUMAR ALIAS KANNU ALIAS TIDDI v. STATE OF PUNJAB
CRM-M/8101/2025 · 2025-09-23
Sukhvinder Kaur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11665 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11665 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 230 CRM-M-8101-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.09.2025. Karan Kumar @ Kannu @ Tiddi ...Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent. ***
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR ....... Present: Ms. Neetu Singh Aashat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab. *** SUKHVINDER KAUR
, J. (Oral)
Present petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.54 dated 03.04.2024, under Sections 326, 324, 341, 148, 149, 427 and 506 of IPC, registered at Police Station Tibba, District Ludhiana. As per prosecution case, the instant FIR was registered on the statement of Amit Kumar to the effect that on 01.04.2024, accused Sunny came along with 14-15 unknown persons on motorcycles. They were armed with deadly weapons i.e. talwar, daah, baseball and glass bottles and all started hurling abuses. On hearing the same, the complainant came out and saw that the above said persons had surrounded his mother and father. Accused Sunny gave sword blow on the head of his father and other accused persons gave severe beatings to his father and they even damaged the vehicles parked in the street. All the accused persons fled away from the KOMAL 2025.09.23 17:56 I attest to the accuracy of this document
CRM-M-8101-2025 (O&M) -2- spot after threatening the complainant and his family members with dire consequences. On 01.04.2024, accused Sunny was nabbed and sword was recovered from him and he was identified by the complainant. During interrogation, accused Sunny disclosed that Gautam Bains @ Karan, Karan @ Tiddi, Sahil, Abhishek, Varun, Mohit and Suraj had accompanied him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case as he is not connected with the offence in any manner. Initially the name of the petitioner was not mentioned in the FIR but his name surfaced later on the supplementary statement of the complainant and disclosure statement of co-accused Sunny. Co-accused Karanvir Singh @ Kanna has already been granted concession of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.11.2024 in CRM-M-48023-2024. He has urged that as trial of the case is likely to take time, therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail. Notice was issued in this case on 03.07.2025 and status report was called from the State, which was filed on 26.08.2025 and the same is taken on record. Learned State counsel has opposed the petition and submitted that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. As per disclosure statement suffered by co-accused the petitioner also actively participated in the occurrence and as such he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. Heard. Initially the name of the petitioner was not mentioned in the FIR but his name cropped up on the supplementary statement of the complainant and disclosure statement of co-accused Sunny. The grievous KOMAL 2025.09.23 17:56 I attest to the accuracy of this document
CRM-M-8101-2025 (O&M) -3- injury in the present case has not been attributed to the petitioner. Rather no specific injury has been attributed to him. Co-accused Karanvir Singh @ Kanna has already been granted concession of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.11.2024 in CRM-M-48023-2024. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody since 01 year, 05 months and 02 days. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time, so no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE
23.09.2025. Komal Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No Whether reportable?
: Yes/ No KOMAL 2025.09.23 17:56 I attest to the accuracy of this document