CRM-M-49319-2025 -1- 212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-49319-2025 Date of decision:09.09.2025 VICKY SINGH ...Petitioner versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Kulwinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab. *** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.44 dated 25.03.2025 under Sections 96 and 137(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station City-2, Mansa, District. Mansa. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of alleged commission of offence, age of prosecutrix was 17 years and 08 months and she was on the verge of attaining majority. He further submits that allegation against the petitioner was that he allured her for marriage. He next argued that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix did not support the case; that challan had been presented in the Court and trial would take long to conclude. Notice of motion. Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab appears and accepts the notice on behalf of the respondent. Learned State Counsel has SUNIL CHANDER 2025.09.09 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-49319-2025 -2- filed custody certificate dated 08.09.2025, which is taken on record. He concedes that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix did not support the version in the FIR. As per allegations, on 22.03.2025, daughter of the complainant (D.o.B. 10.07.2007), who was working in a fashion house at Mansa, went to the shop at 08:30 a.m. but did not return in the evening. Later, on inquiry, complainant came to know that her daughter did not go to the shop for work. It was also revealed that Vicky son of Makhan Singh son of Gulzara Singh had enticed the minor girl on allurement of marriage. Investigation in the case is complete. Challan is stated to have been presented in the Court. Petitioner is in judicial cusotdy w.e.f. 12.05.2025 i.e. for the last more than three months. His antecedents are clean. He is not involved in any other case. Conclusion of trial may take some time. Further detention of the petitioner is not warranted. In these circumstances, but without commenting on merits of the case, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on regular bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 09.09.2025 Sunil Chander SUNIL CHANDER 2025.09.09 18:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document