Avtar Singh @ Dhattu v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 16.03.2026 Date of uploading: 16.03.2026
!
"
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:
Mr. N.S. Dandiwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.
!"# $% &'&#
()*%+,+
+!'-&'&.
++"/+0 +1+/#0 $% &'&# / ++"/&0 $%
0
2 3 &
()* 5 / 3
0 67
!
! "#$%$&
P a g e | 2 '($# )
!*&
+ + + , (( - -$ ! -.%- ) + /
! / 0
!
0
0
+ +
//3 0
45
6
+
+
/ )
/+
)
+ )
4
4 2 /3
!
/ +
! / * / + / * *
5 *
/ + )
* !
/*
+ *
!
+
7 )
! 9
* : ) *
! ;&
;& / ""..&'(-#' ;&87 8) 1 5 (' - -$< 3.
3 &"+'&'&. 8
3
()* 5 8
9
&!'-&'&./ 3
: 7&
0
3
3
3 5 7
8
4
P a g e | 3 4.
3
the allegations raised are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail.
; 3
+.'#&'&, 2
;
5.
I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.
6.
The petitioner was arrested on 28.10.2025 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 23.01.2026. Total 13 prosecution have been cited and charges have been nascently framed on 26.02.2026. It is not in dispute that before this Court that none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined till date. It is also not in dispute that conclusion of trial will take long time. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to the dicta passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494, relevant whereof reads thus: (. 5
! !
/
*
* +
! /
+
+
= 7 *
) *
/ *
>
*
/
!
!
!
*
/ :
! !
/
+
/ *
(" ) /
+ + /* /
* /
P a g e | 4
8
( 5 /
// / !
8
( 5 //
/ * < The rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties; as to the whether the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR, shall be gone into during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage lest it may prejudice the rights of either of the parties. %
;
<
7.
As per the custody certificate dated 15.03.2026 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has suffered incarceration for 4 months & 15 days and is not shown to be involved in any other FIR/case. Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioner in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case. 8.
In view of above, the petition in hand is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned 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.
P a g e | 5 (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.
9.
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 cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
10.
Ordered accordingly.
11.
Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
12.
Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE March 16, 2026 0* Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No