Vishali Alias Robin Alias Mattu v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 03.07.2026 VISHAL ALIAS ROBIN ALIAS MATTU ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB .. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (under Section 439 Cr.P.C) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.167 dated 07.06.2025, registered under Sections 103, 61 (2) and 238 of BNS (earlier Sections 302, 120-B, 201 of IPC) at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that co-accused Kuljit Kaur along with Charanjit Kaur alias Cherry, Abhi and other persons hatched a conspiracy to murder Sahil Masih. It is alleged that after committing the murder, the dead body of the deceased was buried in the house of co-accused Charanjit Kaur/Kuljit Kaur and the same was recovered during investigation. It is further alleged that the present petitioner was nominated later on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Kuljit Kaur alias Gagan, who stated that he had also joined the other accused and had helped in the commission of the offence.

-23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and has been nominated only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused recorded while in police custody, which by itself has no substantive evidentiary value. He further submits that apart from the said disclosure statement, there is no independent evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel submits that the coaccused namely Paras @ Bablu has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court in CRM-M-71702-2025 vide order dated 29.04.2026. It is further contended that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.06.2025 and has undergone more than 01 years 18 days of actual custody. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He submits that the petitioner has been specifically named in the disclosure statements during investigation. He 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 years 18 days.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper-book.

7.

In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 years 18 days; co-accused has already been granted concession of

-3regular bail and that the trial is likely to take a long time, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate 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 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. (H.S.GREWAL) 03.07.2026 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No