Pardeep Bisla v. State Of Haryana

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH


Decided on: 30.04.2026
 

......Petitioner
Versus


  ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

Present:


   

 
 
 


 

****
SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)



 







!

"
#
 
 
$!

%
&'&
#
#

#


 
#
()
 ''

''*&'&+


$ %
,$&%



!

"
""
 
$!

%
&'&
# 

-

. 
/ 
0 
1 
0 

&


 
 

# 


2
2
"

2
2"

32
 


#
 
 

 


#


42"
#
 #

 




#
 
 
22
 #


2

  , '''56
2

&'&+

7"
&'&+

"

 #
 
2
 
"
 
 2

 


2
8

 '9&'&+
 


 
:

 2642"
 
"
2


 2



 
#

22
"
 


 

 

: 

-2-

8
 

 


 
 


 "

 '&'&+;
 #

2
<
 #


2;




 
 
"
'&


=2

;


 
 
 

 
"
 
7
# 
) 
4
 
2=22
 2

 

 


'9
" ;
 
 
()

# 

 


 
:

 
26 42";
 


 
:

 '9&'&+

 
()

#

''*&'&+









2 ;




2




 




"
#
  
 



;



"

 

#






2

+

> 








 

 "
"

#




 




 

 

 
 2#
 

 


 
 
2
 "
2;
2

#

 


 


#

25
"2


2
 
 2


 
 
2

 
2
,

 
#
?
1?

0"
 

 

4



 

 6 

"
"

#



"
"




32
0-

1"



-
0 

&*'

&'&,
<
 "


-3-

&*'

&'&,
 
 
 

#


  
 2#
 
 
 

 
 "

 #




 
42"@

0
##
 
2
<
2

#

22
"
 



 




 

 
2

 

 "
 
4
)


2






#
"2




 
4 


 
42"

 




 




2

  , '''56 

22
"
 

A

B"
 
"

4

 

 
<
42


#
  
=
##
2


 



9
0
8.

Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the present case, the rival contentions of the parties & without commenting upon the merits of the present case, this Court finds merit in the present petition on the following aspects:

(I) investigation has been completed & challan has been filed; (II) the petitioner has been in custody for the last 06 months & 10 day;

(III) FIR was lodged after the petitioner left the job nearly after a period of one & a half month;

-4-
(IV) the trial is at the stage of prosecution evidence whereby out of total 18 prosecution witnesses, 02 have been examined so far; (V) trial is likely to take sufficient time to conclude, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping her in custody for any further period 9.

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

#
 
 

#


 


10.

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.

11.

Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the main case.

(SUBHAS MEHLA)
JUDGE
30.04.2026
Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable:

YES/NO