Aryan Singh Alias Raja v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH 214-II Date of Decision: 17.02.2025 Aryan Singh alias Raja ........Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Vikas P. Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep S. Samra, AAG, Punjab.

***** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (ORAL) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Aryan Singh alias Raja 11.12.2023 307, 392, 34 IPC & 25 of Arms Act.

Focal Point Ludhiana 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that petitioner has not committed any offence nor he was named in the FIR, but lateron the police had falsely implicated him at the instance of complainant party. He argues that no useful purpose would be served to the prosecution by keeping the petitioner in custody for any longer period. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has already been granted regular bail in the connected petition i.e. CRM-M-2366-2025 vide

order of even date. Therefore, he deserves concession of regular bail in this case also.

3.

Learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature. As such, he does not deserve the leniency of the Court in the matter of granting him regular bail. 4.

Learned State counsel further submits that petitioner is an habitual offender and is involved in six different criminal cases, which have also been highlighted in paragraph No. 10 of the status report so filed in the connected petition. However, he admitted that in none of the cases, petitioner has been convicted.

5.

Considering the aspect that the primary evidence available with the prosecution is the disclosure statement either of the accused or of the petitioner himself, the proving of the allegations is heavily on the prosecution. For an indefinite period accused cannot be kept behind the bars by curtailing his liberty.

6.

In view of totality of circumstances, and the facts/allegations levelled against the petitioner, and the factors noticed here-above, I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. 7.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.

8.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or

indirectly.

9.

The observation made here-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. 10.

Petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 17.02.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No