Vikrant Sahota v. State Of Punjab

-1- (109)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 24.03.2026 VIKRANT SAHOTA ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Aditya Dassaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, AAG, Punjab.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in the second petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.05 dated 09.01.2025 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5) of BNS (Section 117(2) BNS added later on) at Police Station Navi Baradari, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is a case of version and cross-version. In fact, it was the petitioner who was attacked by the victim, Harminder Singh, the husband of the present complainant. DDR No.41 dated 28.01.2025 stands registered against Harminder Singh under Section 118(1) of BNS. As the petitioner is in custody since 14.01.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.

-24.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel has filed a reply dated 20.03.2026, which is taken on record. He has not disputed the fact that it is a case of version and cross version. He also admits that the petitioner is in custody since 14.01.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. He, however, states that the petitioner has suffered serious injuries which require multiple surgeries. 5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.

Admittedly, it is a case of version and cross version. As to which party is the aggressor would be determined during the course of the trial. The petitioner is in custody since 14.01.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 8.

Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Vikrant Sahota son of Barjinder Kumar is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

The petitioner shall appear on the first Monday of every month before the police station concerned till the conclusion of the trial and furnish an affidavit each time that he is not involved in any other case other than the present case.

10.

In addition, the petitioner (or someone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial

-3Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from Trial without sufficient cause. 11.

If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

12.

The petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 24.03.2026 kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No