REEMA SAINI 2026.07.22 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-13594 of 2026(O&M) Vicky that they had poured acid, he went inside and saw Vicky scorched with acid. Aman Kumar and Sagar pushed him and fled. He immediately shifted Vicky for treatment to Civil Hospital, Abohar. Vikram @ Vicky had a money dispute with Aman Kumar and Sagar on which account they poured acid on his son. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case at the instance of the complainant. He was behind bars w.e.f. 01.10.2024. Co-accused namely Sagar had already been allowed regular bail. Petitioner thus deserved to be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate alongwith status report by way of affidavit of Harish Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Abohar District Fazilka and has opposed the prayer for bail submitting that on 30.09.2024, both accused, in connivance with each other went to the house of the complainant and made acid attack on him. Allegations against the petitioner were serious and he did not deserve the concession of bail. On a pointed query by the Court, he submits that there was no medico-legal report regarding the burn injuries suffered by injured, 5. The first petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.11.2025. Thereafter, the period of custody undergone can be regarded as a substantial change in circumstance. 6. There is no medico legal report of the injured to determine the extent of the injuries. Co-accused Sagar who allegedly accompanied the petitioner to launch the attack at Vicky had since been released on regular REEMA SAINI 2026.07.22 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh 3 CRM-M-13594 of 2026(O&M) bail vide order dated 28.07.2025. Petitioner is behind bars w.e.f. 01.10.2024 i.e. for the last about 1 year and 9 months. He has clean antecedents. Investigation of the case is complete. Charges have been framed. Out of 13 witnesses, only 1 has been examined so far. Early disposal of the trial is not in sight. Considering the period of custody undergone and stage of trial, petitioner’s right to speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India appears to have been jeopardised. The often invoked phrase ‘Bail is the rule and jail is the exception’ is not merely an empty statutory slogan flowing from the Cr.P.C. It is a constitutional principle flowing from Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution and the presumption of innocence which is the cornerstone of any civilised society governed by the rule of law. (Vide Syed Iftikhar Andrabi Vs. National Investigation agency 2026 SCC online SC 881). 7. Considering the nature and substance of allegations against the petitioner, his clean antecedents, the period of incarceration and all relevant facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits, petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 22.07.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No REEMA SAINI 2026.07.22 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh