Sunil Alias Sonu vs State Of Punjab

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)

This petition has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 petitioner in case FIR No. 81 dated 23.06.2024 under Sections 302,120-B of IPC (corresponding Sections 103 and 61 of BNS) registered at P.S. Lalru, District SAS Nagar (Mohali). 2. The case of the prosecution is that the FIR has been registered on the basis of statement of Randhir Singh to the effect that petitioner alongwith co-accused have murdered his son, namely Bittu. The role attributed to the petitioner is that he had given fist blow on the left eye of the deceased. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years and 02 months and 20 days and is not involved in any other case. He further submits that the co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide CRM-M-41423-2026 decided on 25.08.2026, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Mavpreet Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature. He has filed the custody certificate in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years and 02 months and 20 days and is not involved in any other case.

Mr. Sumit Sihag, Advocate, accepted notice on behalf of the complainant and vehemently opposed the petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail.

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

After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that the complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution;co-accused has been granted regular bail; the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years and 02 month and 20 days and is not involved in any other case; the trial is likely to take time and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. Moreover, ‘bail is the rule and jail is the exception’

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.

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

It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order, if the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.