← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/37169/2025allowed

Deepak Arya v. State Of Punjab

2025-07-21Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal2 pages

CRM-M-37169 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37169 of 2025 Date of decision: 21.07.2025 Deepak Arya

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 

Present:

Mr. S. S. Jattan, Advocate, for the petitioner. 

    **** 

 , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in case FIR No.24 dated 13.03.2024 under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 25 (Added later on) of the Arms Act, 1959 (discharged under Section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967), registered at Police Station Model Town, District Ludhiana.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the prosecution is that on the basis of secret information the petitioner along with co-accused used to prepare forged documents and on the basis of the same they got prepared passports on false address and under false name. It is stated that petitioner is also involved in some other criminal cases. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been acquitted by this Court in a case pertaining to offence under Section 302 IPC. However, petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year 4 months and 03 days as under trial in the present case. Trial is likely to take time for its conclusion and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, petitioner be released on regular bail. ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.23 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-37169 of 2025 4.

Notice of motion.

5.



   , accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 04 months and 03 days. 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 considering the custody period undergone by the petitioner and the fact that trial is yet to commence and likely to take time for its conclusion; the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

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 her 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 their bail.

( ) 

 21.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.23 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document