245 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20341-2025 Date of decision: 19.05.2025 SAGAR ALIAS SANGATDEEP SINGH ….PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ....RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Vinay Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. ***** SANJIV BERRY, J.(ORAL) Status report dated 18.05.2025 in the form of an affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Adampur, District Jalandhar (Rural) has been filed. The same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By way of present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR (Annexure P-1) as under: - FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 55 03.05.2022 379-B, 201 of IPC Bhogpur, District Jalandhar (Rural). 3. Arguments heard. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that the petitioner was granted regular bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 22.06.2022 (Annexure P-2) and the petitioner was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. However, on account of some KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 245 CRM-M-20341-2025 2 unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner could not appear before the learned trial Court on 29.10.2022 and his bail was cancelled and ultimately, he was declared as proclaimed offender vide order dated 27.07.2023. Subsequently, he was arrested on 11.05.2024 and since then he is in custody. He contends that the challan has already been presented in Court wherein 13 witnesses have been cited but only two have been examined till date. Charges have also been framed. He further contends that the conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. Hence, prays for grant of regular bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the bail application by arguing that the petitioner along with co-accused Manwinder Singh alias Sahil had snatched a mobile phone of the complainant by intimidating her by iron patri and recovery of the said mobile phone has been effected from the petitioner. The petitioner is also convicted in FIR No. 49 dated 21.06.2023. Hence, prays for dismissal of the bail. 6. After hearing the respective submissions and perusing the record, it transpires that the petitioner is in custody since 11.05.2024. Challan has already been presented in Court and charges has been framed. Out of 13 witnesses cited by the prosecution, only two witnesses have been examined till date. The conclusion of trial, to ascertain criminal liability of the petitioner, will take sufficient long time and no purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in custody any more. 7. Consequently, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 245 CRM-M-20341-2025 3 bail subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case; undertaking to regularly appear on each and every date; not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court; and not to tamper with evidence of prosecution in any manner. 8. Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 19.05.2025 kanika i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.05.20 18:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment