Aman Bahadur v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 03.07.2026 AMAN BAHADUR ... PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

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

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0024 dated 21.01.2026, registered under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 126(2), 191(3) and 190 of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 323, 324, 506, 341, 148 and 149 IPC), [Sections 3(5), 117(2) and 118(2) of BNS (corresponding to Sections 34, 325 and 326 IPC) were added at the time of presentation of the final report], at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was a member of an unlawful assembly who allegedly attacked the complainant with sharp edged weapons with an intention to kill him. It is also alleged that the petitioner gave two gandasi blows on the leg and foot of the complainant.

-23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry and there is a considerable delay of 06 days in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 03 months and 14 days and co-accused, namely, Gurpreet Singh @ Bicky has already been granted bail by this Court in CRM-M-18254-2026 on 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-6). He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as none out of 16 cited prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 03 months and 14 days. He, upon instructions, submits that although challan has already been presented but none out of 16 cited prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. 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 facts that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 03 months and 14 days, co-accused(s) have already been granted bail and that the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude as the trial is yet to commence, 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.

-38.

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/complainant would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) July 03, 2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No