CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389---- 224 224 224 224 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Bhim Singh State of Punjab CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. registered for the offences punishable under 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 339, 61 Police Station 2. complaint was registered name not known) impersonating as Kapal Kumar, Mohinder Singh (real name not known) impersonating as Mohinder Singh, and Bhim Singh (petitioner herein) Singh in order to execu Singh. ----2025 2025 2025 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Versus Punjab HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Prabhjayot Singh Chahal, Advocate Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present second petition has been filed under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. registered for the offences punishable under 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 339, 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Police Station City-1, District Malerkotla. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that was registered against co-accused Mani name not known) impersonating as Kapal Kumar, Mohinder Singh (real name not known) impersonating as Mohinder Singh, and Bhim Singh (petitioner herein) alleging that they had posed as Kapil Joshi and Mohinder Singh in order to execute sapurdari bonds on behalf of co 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT AT AT AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389----2025 2025 2025 2025 Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: September 16 September 16 September 16 September 16, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 ….Petitioner ….Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.31 dated 01.03.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 216, 319(2), 318, 337, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that a accused Mani Singh, Kapal Kumar (real name not known) impersonating as Kapal Kumar, Mohinder Singh (real name not known) impersonating as Mohinder Singh, and Bhim Singh had posed as Kapil Joshi and Mohinder bonds on behalf of co-accused Mani 1111 2025 2025 2025 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 Petitioner ….Respondent 483 of the for grant of , 216, 319(2), 318, 337, at a Singh, Kapal Kumar (real name not known) impersonating as Kapal Kumar, Mohinder Singh (real name not known) impersonating as Mohinder Singh, and Bhim Singh had posed as Kapil Joshi and Mohinder accused Mani MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389----2025 2025 2025 2025 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 01.03.2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has iterated that the petitioner is nowhere concerned with the alleged offence committed by the co-accused. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner is a man aged 43 years with clean antecedents, and the only bread-earner of his family. Learned counsel has also argued that the co- accused have also been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide orders dated 27.08.2025 and 01.09.2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is in custody for more than 06 months. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated 15.09.2025, in the Court today, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 01.03.2025 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 21.04.2025. Total 16 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which, 01 has been examined in part till date. It is thus, indubitable that culmination of the trial will take long time. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389----2025 2025 2025 2025 forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1. Indubitably, the present petition is the second attempt by the petitioner to secure regular bail. The last bail plea preferred by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.05.2025. However, keeping in view extended custody of the petitioner for a period of more than 03 months and no substantial progress in trial, this Court is inclined to affirmatively consider the instant plea for bail. A profitable reference, in this regard, can be made to a judgment of this Court passed in CRA CRA CRA CRA----SSSS----2332 2332 2332 2332----2023 2023 2023 2023 titled as Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another; relevant whereof reads as under: “10. As an epilogue to the above discussion, the following principles emerge: I Second/successive regular bail petition(s) filed is maintainable in law & hence such petition ought not to be rejected solely on the ground of maintainability thereof. II. Such second/successive regular bail petition(s) is maintainable whether earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn/dismissed as not pressed/dismissed for non-prosecution or earlier petition was dismissed on merits. III For the second/successive regular bail petition(s) to succeed, the petitioner/applicant shall be essentially/pertinently required to show substantial change in circumstances and showing of a mere superficial or ostensible change would not suffice. The metaphoric expression of seeking second/successive bail plea(s) ought not be abstracted into literal iterations of petition(s) without substantial, effective and consequential change in circumstances. IV No exhaustive guidelines can possibly be laid down as to what would constitute substantial change in circumstances as every case has its own unique facts/circumstance. Making such an attempt is nothing but an utopian endeavour. Ergo, this issue is best left to the judicial wisdom and discretion of the Court dealing with such second/successive regular bail petition(s). V In case a Court chooses to grant second/successive regular bail petition(s), cogent and lucid reasons are pertinently required to be recorded for granting such plea despite such a plea being second/successive petition(s). In other words, the cause for a Court having successfully countenanced/entertained such second/successive petition(s) ought to be readily and clearly decipherable from the said order passed.” MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389----2025 2025 2025 2025 6.2. As per custody certificate dated 15.09.2025 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 06 months and 09 days, & is not shown to be involved in any other FIR(s). Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 5555 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----43389 43389 43389 43389----2025 2025 2025 2025 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 16 September 16 September 16 September 16, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment