AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., read with Section 483 BNS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.186 dated 20.09.2024, under Sections 109(1), 3(5), 341(2), 61 of BNS (corresponding to Sections 34, 120-B, 307, 473 and 201 IPC) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Raipur Rani, Tehsil and District Panchkula.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year and about 9 months. He has been falsely implicated in the case. His name surfaced in the disclosure statement made by co-accused with the allegations of he having allegedly fired a shot at the complainant, who as a matter of fact, has turned hostile. There is no recovery effected from the petitioner and in evidence, nothing has emerged to connect him with the crime, but for the aforesaid disclosure statement. Charges were framed on 14.10.2025, however, out of 52 prosecution witnesses, only 7 including the eye-witness stand examined. The petitioner is not involved in any other case. Co-accused, namely, Sunil Kumar @ Shillu, Vishal @ Roda, Sajid Khan, Gurjeet Singh and Akshit have since been granted bail by this Court, vide orders, Annexures P-2 to P-6.
The custody certificate dated 15.09.2026, filed by learned State counsel, is taken on record, as per which, the petitioner is behind bars for 1 year, 8 months and 21 days.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the petitioner had actively participated in the commission of offence, however, is unable to controvert the submissions made regarding the stage of the trial, he being not involved in any other case, co-accused are on bail and the complainant having been turned hostile.
Heard.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for 1 year, 8 months and 21 days; not involved in any other case; co-accused already enlarged on bail; charges stand framed on 14.10.2025; 7 witnesses, including the complainant and eye-witness/injured, out of 52, have been examined; the trial is likely to take a considerable time and further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, thus the present petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the conditions imposed by the trial Court, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.
In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.