Rohit @ Bokar v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 04.05.2026 ROHIT @ BOKAR ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT Present:- Mr. Tushar Wadhwa, Advocate and Ms. Aastha S. Wadhwa, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 57 dated 22.06.2024 under Sections 307,323,324,341 of IPC (corresponding Sections 109,115(2), 118(1), 16(2) of BNS) registered at Police Station Payal District Ludhiana.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner hit the complainant's brother on the head and neck with a brick lying by the roadside, causing serious injuries.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2024. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as the trial is likely to take a long time.

-24.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. P.S.Pandher, Assistant A.G.Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year 10 months and 08 days and is not involved in any other case. He further submits that although challan has been presented.

6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 10 months and 08 days, he is not involved in any other case and that the trial is likely to take a long time, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. 8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

-310.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. (H.S.GREWAL) 04.05.2026 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No