Vikas v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No.225 Case No. : CRM-M-33261-2025 Decided On : August 26, 2025 Vikas ....

Petitioner vs.

State of Haryana ....

Respondent CORAM :

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

* * * Present :

Mr. Khush Deep Mann, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. P. K. Garg, DAG, Haryana.

* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.

:

Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.83 dated 24.03.2025, under Sections 61, 212(a), 318(4), 319, 336(3), 338, 340 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at Police Station Ambala City, District Ambala. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was confined in judicial custody in another FIR No.15 dated 25.01.2025 and was granted regular bail in that case vide order dated 13.03.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner was ordered to be released on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety. While furnishing surety bonds, one Mandeep son of Sahib Singh furnished surety bonds on behalf of the accused but the same were found to be forged qua which a complaint was made by Reader of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala and petitioner

was arrested on 11.04.2025 in the present FIR, while being in custody. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner was not named in the FIR. He was named later, being the beneficiary. In fact, he has not forged any document. Rather, he had no clue about the incident in question. He did not produce any forged document in the Court. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 11.04.2025. The co-accused namely Manmohan Singh has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.06.2025 and therefore, it has been prayed that the petitioner be also released on bail. Learned State counsel has opposed the bail petition while contending that the petitioner, in connivance with other co-accused, has committed grave offence to get him released on the basis of forged documents. He is also involved in another FIR under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. So, he does not deserve the concession of bail.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file.

The petitioner is alleged to be the beneficiary and for getting him released on bail, the forged documents were allegedly produced in Court. The co-accused Manmohan Singh had already been released on bail. As per the Custody Certificate placed on record, the petitioner has already undergone custody of 04 months and 15 days, as on 25.08.2025. Trial of the case is going on and conclusion of the same is likely to take time. So, no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition.

August 26, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No.