Sandeep Alias Mohit Alias Datar v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 02.07.2026 Sandeep @ Mohit @ Datar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present :

Mr. Nikhil Kumar Vashisht, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.60 dated 02.07.2023, registered under Sections 302, 341, 325, 324, 323, 148 & 149 of IPC, (103(1), 126(2), 117(2), 118(1), 191(3) and 190 of BNS, 2023) Police Station Nakodar Sadar, District Jalandhar (Rural).

-22.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends the the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. By referring to the post-mortem report (Annexure P-2), learned counsel contends that the ocular version of the prosecution is not supported by medical evidence. Even otherwise, the petitioner had no motive or enmity with the deceased nor he had caused any injury to him. Learned counsel further contends that in the present case, the supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded and 02 other co-accused namely Rajiv and Manni were nominated as accused in the present case. However, both of them have been granted the concession of bail. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 02.07.2023 and is in custody for the last more than 02 years.

3.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court.

4.

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

5.

In the present case, the medical evidence does not support the version of the prosecution. The petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last more than 02 years and the prosecution has not brought on record any evidence to indicate that the petitioner is in a position to influence the witnesses of the prosecution. The co-accused

-3namely, Rajit, has already been granted the concession of bail by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2025 (Annexure P-2). Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 6.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned.

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case he is not holder of the same, he shall swear an affidavit to that effect. (v) The petitioner shall also file his affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning his ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by him during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned Trial Court.

(vi) In case, the petitioner gets involved in any other criminal activity, during the pendency of the trial, it shall be viewed seriously and the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail granted to the present petitioner. (vii) The concerned Court may insist two heavy local surties and may also impose any other condition, in

-4accordance with law, while accepting the bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner.

(viii) The petitioner shall report every 1st and 3rd Monday in English calander month before the concerned SHO till the conclusion of the trial and SHO shall mark his presence by making an entry in the Rojnamcha. In case, he does not report on every 1st and 3rd Monday before the concerned SHO, it shall be viewed seriously and the concession granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and the State of Punjab shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard.

02.07.2026 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) amit rana JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking :

Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No