Naresh Kumar v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-72274-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.04.2026 NARESH KUMAR ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Ms. Pooja Jaglan, Advocate for Mr. Mayur Karkra, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) CRM-10018-2026 Allowed as prayed for.

CRM-10019-2026 This application has been filed for placing on record a copy of medical card issued to the petitioner by jail authorities as Anneuxre A-1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and a copy of medical card issued to the petitioner by jail authorities is ordered to be taken on record as Annexure A-1.

Main case:

1.

This petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C (Section 483 of BNSS, 2023) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 330 Cr.P.C (Sections 528 and 368 of BNSS, 2023) for grant of regular bail in the case FIR No. 51 dated 23.06.2023 under Sections 323, 341, 324, 427, 452 and 506 IPC

-2- (Sections 307, 326 and Section 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner forcibly entered the house of the complainant and inflicted a knife blow on the left side of the stomach of the complainant, namely Nanak Chand, who is the brother-in-law of the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from bipolar effective disorder, which renders him incapable of rational decision-making, and this condition was well within the knowledge of the complainant and his relatives. She further submits that there is a delay of about five days in lodging of the FIR. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.02.2025.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. P.S.Pandher, Asst. A.G.Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious. He further submits that out of 14 cited prosecution witnesses only 01 has ben examined so far. 6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions and considering that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 02 months and 1 day, is not involved in any other case, out of 14 cited prosecution witnesses, only 01 has

-3been examined so far, coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail 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/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. 11.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 07.04.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No