Akhil v. State Of Ut Chandigarh

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.12.2025 Akhil ... Petitioner

Versus

State of U.T., Chandigarh ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:

Mr. Manjot Gujral, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T., Chandigarh.

...

MANISHA BATRA , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner is seeking indulgence of this Court by filing the present petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short "BNSS") for grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.204, dated 01.10.2024, registered under Sections 309(4) of the BNS (offences under Sections 3(5), 317(2), 126(2), 311 of the BNS were added lateron), at Police Station Sector-36, Chandigarh, on the allegations of snatching a mobile phone and a sum of Rs.5,500/- by showing knife to the complainant - Pardeep Singh. Petitioner was arrested on 01.10.2024. He was extended benefit of bail on 13.11.2024. He had absented himself due to which his bail was cancelled and bonds were forfeited to the State on 22.05.2025. Now he has been arrested again on 18.08.2025 and is facing trial.

-22.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody for a period of about four months. His absence was not intentional. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed upon him. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

3.

Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are chances of the petitioner's absconding again, if extended benefit of bail. Hence, it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 4.

This Court has considered the rival submissions. 5.

The petitioner had been granted concession of bail and had absented himself on 22.05.2025. Now he is in custody since 18.08.2025. This Court is of the considered opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The trial will take considerable time to conclude.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds of two sureties to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned and further subject to the conditions; that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case; he shall appear before the learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing except when his presence has been exempted by the trial Court; he shall surrender his passport, if any, furnish details of his cell phone and Aadhaar card, and shall not change his mobile number(s) during the pendency of the trial; he shall not leave the country without the permission of the learned trial Court.

-36.

It is clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. (MANISHA BATRA) 01.12.2025 JUDGE harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No