Manish Kumar v. State Of Punjab

-1CRM-M-40846-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40846-2025 Date of decision: 05.08.2025 MANISH KUMAR ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL
 Mr. Parvez Chugh, Advocate for the petitioner. *** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral)
  The present is the second petition which has been filed under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking regular bail in FIR No.84 dated 19.04.2018 under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, 1860 and Section 214 of Immigration Act registered at Police Station Mataur, District SAS Nagar.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has duped the complainant Jaspal Singh to the tune of Rs.50,000/- on the pretext of sending him abroad but he neither sent them abroad nor returned the money. There are 11 other FIRs registered against the petitioner for similar offences. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is in custody for more than 06 months and charges are yet to be framed. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

6.

Learned counsel for the State by way of filing custody certificate Sonia Puri 2025.08.07 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2CRM-M-40846-2025 dated 04.08.2025 vehemently opposes the grant of concession of regular bail and does not refute the fact that the petitioner is in custody for 06 months and 03 days and challan stands presented, however charges are yet to be framed. He further states that the petitioner is involved in 10 more cases. 7.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

8.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that the custody period undergone by the petitioner is 06 months and 03 days; charges are yet to be framed, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time, therefore further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. This Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

9.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted concession of regular bail in the present case, on her furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/ Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 10.

It is however, made clear that in case during her bail, the petitioner indulges in any offence, the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

05th August, 2025 (H.S. GREWAL) Sonia Puri JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Sonia Puri 2025.08.07 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document