220+373 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28418-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:19.08.2025 Sham Lal Arora …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate with Mr. V.G Jauhar, Advocate Mr. Ranwant Singh Sangha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) CRM-29527-2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner wishes to withdraw the present application. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn. Main case 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No. 17, dated 10.03.2025, registered under Sections 420,465,467,468,471,120-B of IPC and Section 7-A of P.C Act, Police Station Vigilance Bureau, District Patiala (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the present FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint moved by Deshmukh Goyal, who HITESH 2025.08.20 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-28418-2025 (O&M) -2 himself is habitual offender and is involved in more than five criminal cases. Still further, the allegations were primarily levelled against Arpreet Sehgal and no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner. He further contends that the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 11.03.2025 and he had already suffered the custody of more than three months as an undertrial. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the orders (Annexures P-3 to P-9) to contend that the similarly placed co-accused Arpreet Singh, Kuldeep Singh, Rupinder Singh, Raj Kumar, Kulwant Rai, Harmeet Singh Sehgal and Permanand Kansal have been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court. Learned counsel further contends that Bharti Arora, wife of the petitioner is seriously ill and at present she is on ventilator support. Consequently, the case of the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration by this Court. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is involved in three more criminal cases. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. In the present case, the petitioner has already suffered the custody of more than three months and after completion of investigation,the challan has already been presented against him. Moreover, even as per the admitted the case, wife of the petitioner is admitted in Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana since 28.07.2025 and at present, she is under observtion in I.C.U and has developed several medical complications. 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 HITESH 2025.08.20 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-28418-2025 (O&M) -3 furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 19.08.2025 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2025.08.20 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh