IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 228 CRM-M-28006-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.08.2025. Pardeep Singh @ Honey ...Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent. *** CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR ....... Present: Mr. Barjesh K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Pandher, AAG, 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.163 dated 08.11.2023, under Sections 379B(2) and 411 of IPC, registered at Police Station Focal Point, District Ludhiana. As per prosecution case, on 07.11.2023, the complainant was going back to his house. Then two persons came from backside on motorcycle and asked for his mobile phone. When he refused, one of the riders caught hold him by his arms and the other rider armed with iron daat inflicted blow upon him which hit on his left shoulder and snatched his mobile phone and fled away. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged recovery have also been falsely planted by the police. He is in judicial lockup and no longer required for further investigation. He has urged that as trial of the case is likely to take time, therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail. KOMAL 2025.08.20 18:09 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-28006-2025 (O&M) -2- Notice was issued in this case on 26.05.2025 and status report was called from the State, which was filed on 05.08.2025 and the same is taken on record. Learned State counsel has opposed the petition and submitted that there are serious allegations against the petitioner that he along with co- accused snatched mobile phone from the complainant and also caused injuries on his person while snatching and as such he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. Heard. Recovery in the present case has already been effected. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody since 01 year, 09 months and 09 days. As per status report, the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. As 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 20.08.2025. Komal Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No Whether reportable? : Yes/ No KOMAL 2025.08.20 18:09 I attest to the accuracy of this document