Gulshan Kumar Sharma Alias Tinku v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 GULSHAN KUMAR SHARMA @ TINKU ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Advocate for Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS in case FIR No. 0138 dated 19.12.2023 under Sections 353,332,333,341,506,186,427,379-B, 34 IPC registered at Police Station, Cantt Ferozepur District Ferozepur.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with two unidentified persons stopped the vehicle of the complainant namely Rajinder Pal Goyal caused injuries to him and also damaged his vehicle. It is alleged that the petitioner also gave hammer blow on the right leg of the complainant. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed any offence. The petitioner is in custody since 22.12.2023. He further submits that

-2the complainant has been partly examined. He has placed on record the zimni orders wherein the complainant has not appeared before the Court concerned and bailable warrants has also been issued against him on previous occasions. He further submits that the complainant himself is delaying the trial. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in the Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 08 months and 15 days and is involved in many other cases.

6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

Keeping in view the above and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 08 months and 15 days; the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, this Court deems it a fit case 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 his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

-39.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the applicant is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) 08.09.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No