AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
The instant 2nd petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
| Name of Petitioner(s) | FIR No. | Date | Section(s) | Police Station | District |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radha Krishan, aged about 69 years | 0081 | 27.05.2024 | 452 (333 BNS), 324 (118(1) BNS), 506 (352 BNS) of IPC, 1860 (offence under section 326 (118(2) BNS), vide DDR No.41 dated 11.06.2024, offence under section 450 (332 BNS), vide DDR No.14 dated 13.07.2024, offence under section 307 of IPC (109 BNS), vide DDR No.18 dated 13.08.2024 added later on) | City Malout | Sir Muktsar Sahib |
On the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first petition, i.e. CRM-M-66560-2025, filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail, was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 06.03.2026, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after completion of two years of incarceration, in the event prosecution evidence had not been concluded by then.
Hence, present petition seeking regular bail has been filed for the second time, as petitioner has already undergone incarceration for a period of two years and three months.
Today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the allegations, petitioner had inflicted two kappa blows on the head of complainant’s father, namely, Vijay Kumar, and had also inflicted a kappa blow on the head of the complainant’s neighbour, namely, Seema Devi.
Injuries suffered by both the injured namely Vijay Kumar and Seema Devi, are detailed here under:-
“(ii)Detail of MLRs
(a)As per MLR No.RS/74/MLR/2024 dated 27.05.2024 (Civil Hospital, Malout) of the injured Vijay Kumar son of Sohan Lal Two injuries. Both the injuries were declared as grievous by the Doctor.
(b)As per MLR No.RS/75/MLR/2024 dated 27.05.2024 (Civil Hospital, Malout) of the injured Seema Devi wife of Rattan lal, there is one injury on her person. The injury No.1 was declared as dangerous to life by the Doctor.”
It is further submitted by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is inside jail since 28.05.2024, and has, thus, undergone incarceration for a period of two years, three months and two days. It is further submitted that both the injured witnesses, namely Vijay Kumar and Seema Devi, have already been examined on 05.02.2026 and 09.03.2026, respectively. Learned counsel, therefore, prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.
In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 31.08.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.
As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner has already undergone 02 years 03 months and 02 days period inside jail.
Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that both the injured persons had suffered head injuries, and the head injury sustained by injured Seema Devi was declared dangerous to life. It is, therefore, contended that, keeping in view the gravity and seriousness of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, he does not deserve the concession of regular bail in the present case. Learned State counsel, accordingly, prays for dismissal of the present petition.
However, on being specifically asked by the Court, learned State counsel submits that out of total 23 prosecution witnesses, 10 witnesses have already been given up, while 11 witnesses have already been examined. Thus, only 02 prosecution witnesses remain to be examined.
This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and has also gone through the record available before it.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the present case, allegations levelled against the petitioner and the factors noticed here above, including the fact that petitioner has undergone incarceration for a period of two years and three months and material witnesses, including both the injured persons, have already been examined, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.
Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.
Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.
Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
Petition stands disposed of.