CRM-M-7712 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 205 JAGAN NATH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present:- Mr. Tarun Deora for the petitioner. Mr TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA The instant petition has been filed under Section 2023, seeking 18.10.2024, registered under Section 117(2) and 118(2) 2. The FIR was lodged on 17.10.2024 that the victim attacked by three in the FIR. Later, the victim on 17.10.2024 subsequently witnesses/Simranjit Singh and Parminder Singh alleging that he 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that false implication which 7712-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of Decision: JAGAN NATH Versus PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Mr. Tarun Deora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpartap Singh Bhullar, AAG, Punjab. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Section seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case , registered under Sections 3(5), 115(2) and 118(2) BNS added later on), at Police Station The FIR was lodged on the statement of Gurpreet Singh that the victim/Ramesh Behal, who was attacked by three unknown persons on 12.10.2024 Later, the victim also recorded a statement on 17.10.2024, but did not disclose the subsequently involved in the case on the statement /Simranjit Singh and Parminder Singh that he gave injuries to the victim with Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that false implication which is apparent from the fact that IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-7712-2025 Date of Decision: 28.04.2025 …Petitioner(s) …Respondent(s) TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA , AAG, Punjab. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.285 dated 3(5), 115(2), 118(1) BNS (Sections at Police Station Civil Lines, Batala. statement of Gurpreet Singh, dated , who was riding a motorcycle, was 12.10.2024. None of three was named statement regarding the incident disclose the petitioner’s name who was in the case on the statements of two other eye- /Simranjit Singh and Parminder Singh recorded on 19.10.2024, injuries to the victim with a baseball bat. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is a case of is apparent from the fact that petitioner has been BNSS, dated Sections , dated , was named regarding the incident was - , of been Aman Dua 2025.04.29 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-7712 named after seven days of the incident. The FIR itself was of about five days have been framed 19.10.2024. 4. Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the aforementioned. He contends that who will be examined been specifically bail. 5. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered. 6. Apparently, none of the witnesses has been examined conclusion of the trial will take some over and there is no apprehension of the petitioner t evidence or threatening the witnesses. Therefore, served by confining him 7. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 28.04.2025 Ad 7712-2025 -2- named after seven days of the incident. The FIR itself was of about five days. Investigation of the case is already complete have been framed on 04.02.2025. The petitioner is in custody since Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the aforementioned. He contends that there are fourteen be examined soon and trial will be concluded. The petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR and does not deserve Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been Apparently, none of the witnesses has been examined of the trial will take some time. Investigation here is no apprehension of the petitioner t or threatening the witnesses. Therefore, served by confining him to custody during trial Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty concerned. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable named after seven days of the incident. The FIR itself was lodged after delay the case is already complete, and charges The petitioner is in custody since Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the facts fourteen prosecution witnesses, and trial will be concluded. The petitioner has named in the FIR and does not deserve the benefit of regular Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been Apparently, none of the witnesses has been examined so far and nvestigation of the case is already here is no apprehension of the petitioner tampering with the or threatening the witnesses. Therefore, no useful purpose will be custody during trial. Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No after delay , and charges The petitioner is in custody since facts , and trial will be concluded. The petitioner has regular Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been and is already mpering with the will be Accordingly, petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty ) Aman Dua 2025.04.29 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document