Sunil Kumar Alias Bachi Alias Bhawan v. State Of Punjab

 

           

 

 

!"#"$%&& ' ()   ( '

 ( '  *  &&&

"

"$ + ,' '

' - 

 &&& #.$/ $

 %0 (& '&'&* (&

Present:

Mr. Amit Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. **** &'&* (2 &3 (4 1.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 0075 dated 11.04.2025 under Sections 109,333,115(2), 118(1), 191(3), 190, 324(4) of BNS and Sections 249,61(2), 117(2) of BNS (Added later on) registered at Police Station Samrala, District Khanna.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with his co3accused, armed with a sword, attacked the complainant and inflicted injuries on the forehead as well as on the right hand of the complainant. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the injuries attributed to the petitioner have been declared to be simple in nature. The petitioner has been in custody since 19.08.2025. 4.

Notice of motion.

 5.

Mr. Adesh Pal Singh, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. He further submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 06 years and 01 day and is involved in 11 more cases. He further submits that challan has been presented; charges are yet to be framed in the present case.

6.

I have heard the submissions made by ld. counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that although the petitioner is involved in other cases but he has been released on bail in those cases; petitioner is in custody for the last 06 years 01 day; trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the view that further detention of the petitioners would not serve any useful purpose. Moreover, it is a settled principle of law that "
 

      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/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

 10.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 3&'&* (4 &&