Jai Karan Joshi v. State Of U.T. Chandigarh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 08.07.2025 Jai Karan Joshi
...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.T. Chandigarh
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present :
Mr. Saurabh Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P. for U.T. Chandigarh.
****
, J. (Oral) 1.
The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.78 dated 16.07.2024, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Sector-3, Chandigarh.
2.
The allegations against the petitioner are that he is running an institute in the name of Golden Overseas and cheated on people on the pretext of sending them abroad and misappropriated amount of Rs.8 Lakhs. It is stated that he is also indulged in some other cases of forgery. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 16.07.2024. After investigation, challan has been present before the Court of competent jurisdiction, charges are yet to be framed. Moreover, petitioner has undergone 11 months and 22 days as of today. He further submits that since trial is likely to take some time to conclude and
undertaking given by him that he would stop this activity and not indulge in such type of activity, therefore, petitioner be released on regular bail. 4.
Notice of motion.
5.
Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U. T. Chandigarh, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 08.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 11 months and 22 days.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7.
In view of the above submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the undergone period and the fact that trial is likely to take such a long time and undertaking given by him to the effect that he would stop this activity and not indulge in such type of activity, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.
8.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
9.
However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.
( )
08.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No