CRM-M-14065-2025 -1- 233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14065-2025 Date of Decision:20.03.2025 ROHIT KUMAR …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Robindeep Singh Bhullar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.142 dated 18.11.2024, registered under Sections 109, 309(6), 118(1) of BNS & 25 of Arms Act 1959, Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar (Ropar). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not initially named in the FIR and has been involved only on the basis of suspicion. He further contends that it has been wrongly alleged that the petitioner had caused injuries to the complainant with a knife as all the injuries suffered by the complainant in the present case have been declared to be simple and superficial injuries. Thus, the provision of Section 109 IPC have been wrongly invoked in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was VIPIN KUMAR 2025.03.21 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-14065-2025 -2- arrested in the present case on 19.11.2024 and is behind bars for the last more than 04 months. After completion of investigation, challan has already been presented against him. Even though the petitioner was involved in two more cases but he is already on bail in the said cases. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 19.11.2024 and challan has already been presented against the petitioner. Moreover, all the injuries suffered by Jaspreet-complainant have already been declared to be simple in nature in the present case. Thus, the conclusion of the trial may quite a take long time and his further detention will not serve any meaningful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority. (ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. VIPIN KUMAR 2025.03.21 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-14065-2025 -3- (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned. (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case he is not holder of the same, he shall swear an affidavit to that effect. (v) The petitioner shall also file his affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning his ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by him during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned Trial Court. (vi) In case, the petitioner is involved in any other criminal activity, during the pendency of the trial, it shall be viewed seriously. (vii) The concerned Court may insist on two heavy local sureties and may also impose any other condition, in accordance with law, while accepting the bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner. 7. In case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions mentioned above, it shall be viewed seriously and the concession of bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application in this regard. 20.03.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.03.21 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order