Suraj Sharma Alias Sucha v. State Of Punjab

215-2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 03.02.2025 SURAJ SHARMA ALIAS SUCHA ....Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner(s). **** 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 Suraj Sharma @ Sucha 07.07.2024 111 of BNS 2023 and 25(7) of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 54 and 59 of Arms Act added later on) Civil Lines Police Commissione rate Amritsar 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations which have been levelled against the petitioner are also the allegations against the co-accused, namely, Arpit Thakur. The said co-accused has already been granted the concession of bail by this Court, vide order dated

23.01.2025, passed in CRM-M-2705-2025, titled as 'Arpit Thakur vs. State of Punjab.

3.

Further submits that for no reason the petitioner has been kept behind bars, and culmination of the trial is likely to take considerable time. 4.

Mr. Amandeep Sigh Samra, AAG, Punjab, appearing on advance notice does not dispute the factual aspects, which have already been recorded in the bail order of the co-accused, Arpit Thakur, dated 23.01.2025, and also submits that final report has already been submitted, however, process of recording of evidence is yet to start. Even charges have not been framed.

5.

Looking at the aspect that co-accused, Arpit Thakur, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, vide order dated 23.01.2025, and finalization of the proceedings is likely to take considerable time, this Court does not find any special reason to keep the present petitioner inside jail for indefinite period.

6.

In view of totality of circumstances, and the facts/allegations levelled against the petitioner, and the factors noticed hereinabove, 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 hereinabove 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 February 03, 2025 sangeeta Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO