Charandass @ Channi v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (209) Date of Decision:-05.08.2025 Charandass @ Channi ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ****

Present:

Mr. Rahul Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate for the complainant. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed inter alia praying for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 72 dated 29.05.2025, under Sections 137 (2) and 87 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

2.

Status report by way of an affidavit of Manjit Singh Aulakh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar, Punjab has been filed by learned State counsel on behalf of respondent-State, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner. 3.

The present case is a reflection of the society which is changing fast. It's a case of adolescence love where the petitioner herein is

a young boy who was in a relationship with the prosecutrix. In order to protect their relationship, the petitioner and the prosecutrix joined each other company and approached this Court seeking protection of their life and liberty and thereafter, on account of certain family pressure, the present FIR came to be lodged and the petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2025. 4.

The parents of the parties have amicably resolved the misunderstanding and have acknowledge their relationship, however, since the prosecutrix had yet not attained the age of majority, therefore, in the compromise it has been agreed that the petitioner and the prosecutrix will be married on her attaining the age of majority. 5.

Learned counsel for the complainant does not object and submits on the same lines, however, learned counsel for the State submits that the prosecutrix is a minor and in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutirx has rather stated that she went in the company of the petitioner in her own accord though the statement of the minor cannot be relied upon.

6.

Learned State counsel has also filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record, according to which the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 month and 26 days. 6.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 7.

In light of the above and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances and the fact that the petitioner is a young boy of 24 years, coupled with the fact that the he is in custody for the last last 01 month and 26 days and the trial is likely to take time, therefore, no useful purpose

would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody, hence, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of the concession of regular bail. 8.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition stands allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail if not required in any other case on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall declare his ordinary place of residence and the mobile number used by him.

ii.

The petitioner will not switch off his mobile and in case of any technical glitch, he has to give an alternate number, which will be available in his absence.

iii.

The petitioner will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court, for which he will submit the copy of his passport also. However, in case the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he shall file an undertaking to the said effect before being released.

The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. 9.

However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be considered as parity qua any other co-accused in any manner whatsoever. 10.

It is further made clear that, in case, the petitioner is found involved in any such activity once again, the State is at liberty to promptly

move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of conditions of bail. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE August 05, 2025 parul Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No