Karan Kumar Alias Kanni v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-61710-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-61710-2024 Date of Decision: 29.07.2025 KARAN KUMAR ALIAS KANNI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Nandan Jindal, 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, 2023 in case FIR No. 205 dated 13.08.2012 under Sections 302,336,148,149 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act registered at Police Station City Patti, District Tarn Taran.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was earlier granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 25.04.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner was appearing before the ld. trial Court regularly but on 21.11.2014 he failed to appear as result, he was declared proclaimed offender on 27.01.2015. He further submits that the petitioner was in judicial custody in an FIR No. 64 dated 22.05.2016 under Sections 302/148/149/120-B of IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, Hoshiarpur but the police did not arrest him in the present case (i.e. the case that was registered at Police Station, Patti). He further submits that the complainant while appearing as PW-2 in the Court did not support the prosecution version and PW-3 Gurmukh Singh has also resiled from his earlier statement. The co-accused namely Prince has already been granted bail by the ld. Trial Court.

Renu Rawat 2025.07.31 17.06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-61710-2024 -24.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner. He vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. 6.

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

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years 05 days, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, 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. 9.

It is made clear that if the petitioner, while on bail granted by this order, is found to be involved in any other criminal case, the State may seek to have his bail cancelled. Furthermore, if the petitioner fails to appear before the learned trial Court on any scheduled date, his bail shall be cancelled. (H.S.GREWAL) 29.07.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2025.07.31 17.06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document