Naresh Kumar And Another v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 28.05.2025 NARESH KUMAR AND ANOTHER ... Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Paras Talwar, Advocate for the petitioners.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) 1.

This is a petition for regular bail filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in FIR No.56 dated 19.04.2024 under Sections 108, 62, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (Sections 306, 511, 34 of IPC) registered at Police Station Nehianwala, Bathinda.

  The case of the prosecution is that the complainant namely Nirmaljeet Singh consumed Celphos and became unconscious, however he was taken to hospital where he survived and made a statement that on 16.03.2025, petitioner No.2 had called him from her mobile phone and asked him to transfer Rs.5,000/- on her googlepay while threatening to meet her demand else she would commit suicide or would implicate him in a false case. Consequently, out of fear, the complainant transferred an amount of Rs.5,000/- to her account but he was feeling suffocated due to the act of petitioner no.2 of demanding money

-2on several occasions, therefore, on 16.04.2025, he consumed Celphos. It is alleged by the complainant that he was duped of Rs.7.50 lakhs by both the petitioners. However, it is also stated that the complainant was having an affair with petitioner no.2. Moreover, there is no abetment or words or actions enticing or instigating the complainant to commit suicide. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner(s) has undergone custody for a period of 01 month and 05 days. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Hardeep Singh Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and 



     

            


 6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that custody period undergone by the petitioner(s) in the present case is 01 month and 05 days, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to further detain the petitioners in jail and since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time and as such, further incarceration of the petitioners would not serve the ends of justice. Therefore, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners. 8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioners are granted concession of regular bail in the present case, on their furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/ Chief Judicial Magistrate

-3concerned. The pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 9.

It is however, made clear that in case during his bail, the petitioners indulge in any offence, the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

28th May, 2025 (H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No