Vinod Alias Kalu v. State Of Haryana
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Decided on: 12.12.2025 ......Petitioner Versus ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA
Present:
**** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)
! " # # $ "
% &'& #
()*"'+ ,'
&'&- &$ %$".%"/0 + - &,1"/0 + - 0 2# / ( & ,'
&'&- !
1 0
3 2
3
4! !4 '4 4 41 0
3 2
3 /
1 0
3 2
3 1 4
4 4 !5
3
-2- /
1 4
4
4
&44 # 6 !
4
4 4 1 0
3 2
3 4 4 4 ' 4
1 !
! 7$
8 0&901 %
!4 ' 4
" 4 - *4
7 : ;!
7 1 ! !
! '&&'&-
"/0 + - )07 .' !
;
! 4 ' 4 -! . ; 7.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the petitioner; the coaccused from whose possession the alleged contraband has been
-3- recovered, have already been granted bail by the trial Court; present petitioner is in custody for the last more than 03 months; also there is no material which shows that after release of the petitioner, the petitioner will tamper with the evidence as witnesses are police officials; trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment as culpability is to be decided by trial Court after appreciating evidence adduced by the parties, and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case 7.
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 bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
8.
Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the main case.
(SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 12.12.2025 Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable:
YES/NO