CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 246 ***** CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 Date of decision : 27.7.2026 Date of uploading : 28.7.2026 Vijay Kumar @ Mato ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Maneesh Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present second 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 FIR No.171 dated 7.6.2025 under Sections 115(2), 126(3), 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 118(2), 117(2), 109(1) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar. 2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the present case has been registered on the basis of statement of complainant Sukhwinder Ram son of Joginder Ram with the allegations that on 02.06.2025 he was going on foot towards Bus Stand Khaira and one Vijay Kumar alias Mato of his village was following him. At about 6:35 PM when he reached near the ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -2- hair salon at Khaira Gate, one Sarab Dayal alias Baba was already present there. When he was going under the flyover, above noted Vijay Kumar armed with Khanda came in front of him and he gave khanda blows which hit on his head and on the fingers of his right hand. Above noted Vijay Kumar again gave khanda blow which hit on the upper side of his right ear and again he gave khanda blow on his head due to which he fell down on the ground. Again above noted Vijay Kumar again gave khanda blow which hit on his right foot, right knee and left leg. When he tried to save himself, then Vijay Kumar gave khanda blow which hit on his left elbow. Then he raised hue and cry and he was taken to Civil Hospital, Phillaur, from where he was referred to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar due to serious injuries. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 22.8.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further urged that, at the instance of the complainant-side, the police had changed the version as initially it was shown that the weapon in question was a blunt weapon whereas later on it was shown as sharp edged weapon. Learned counsel has further urged that after withdrawal of the first bail petition, the injured already stands examined and thus, there is no likelihood of the petitioner to abscond from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence/witnesses. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than 11 months and the victim has since been discharged after receiving ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -3- requisite medical treatment. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. In oppugnition, learned State counsel has urged that the injured has received multiple injuries. Learned counsel has further urged that it was just a matter of sheer good-luck of the injured that he was saved despite receiving various injuries on vital parts of his body. Thus, dismissal of the instant petition is entreated for. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 24.7.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 22.8.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out; challan was prepared on 18.11.2025 and subsequently filed. It is not in dispute that out of total 22 cited prosecution witnesses, the injured Sukhwinder Ram already stands examined as a prosecution witness. Another additional prosecution witness Tarsem (mother of injured) also stands examined. The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1 As per custody certificate dated 24.7.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 11 months and 01 day. As per the said custody certificate, the petitioner ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -4- is stated to be involved in 3 other FIRs. Indubitably, the antecedents of a person are required to be accounted for while considering a regular bail petition preferred by him. However, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. 6.2 Indubitably, the present petition is the 2nd attempt by the petitioner to secure regular bail. The last bail plea preferred by the petitioner was withdrawn on 26.2.2026. Keeping in view the extended incarceration of the petitioner, recording of testimony of PW Sukhwinder Ram (injured), this Court is inclined to favourably consider the instant plea for bail. A profitable reference, in this regard, can be made to a judgment of this Court passed in CRA-S-2332-2023 titled as 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: ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -5- 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.” 6.3 Keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the factum of the petitioner having suffered incarceration for about 11 months, the injured having been examined as a prosecution witness, injured having been discharged after receiving requisite medical treatment & pace of trial, this Court is inclined to grant the concession of regular bail. 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 ASHWANI KUMAR ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.40012 of 2026 -6- 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 cell-phone 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 for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 27.7.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.28 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document