Ravi Kumar v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Sr. No.229 Case No. : CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) Decided On : September 10, 2025 Ravi Kumar .... Petitioner vs. State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR. * * *
Legal Reasoning
Present : Mr. Rhythem Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab. * * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. : CRM-19589-2025 : This is application under Section 528 the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking exemption from attaching Aadhar Card or any identity proof of the petitioner with the present petition. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions and applicant-petitioner is exempted from attaching his Aadhar Card or any identity proof with the present petition Main Case :
Decision
The application stands disposed of. Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.118 dated 27.09.2022, under Section MONIKA 2025.09.12 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) 2 379-B IPC (Section 473 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Khuian Sarwar, District Fazilka. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint made by complainant Sandeep Singh, wherein he stated that he was owner of a white colour Swift Dzire Car bearing registration No.PB-15-X-1505 and besides using it for personal use, he used to ply the same on rent for generating some income. He further stated that on 26.09.2022, at about 7/8:00 PM, he received a phone call from his known namely Ravi son of Titu, who asked him to take his known persons of Village Sappanwali to attend a marriage at Rai Singh Nagar on his car on rental basis. He also gave a mobile number to contact those persons. As asked by the petitioner, the complainant made a phone call from his mobile on the number given by the petitioner, whereupon the person answering the call told him that they had to go to Rai Singh Nagar from Village Sappanwali to attend a marriage and that they would return the next night. The complainant was also asked to reach at bus stand near Village Sappanwali at 09:30 PM, from where he would be brought along with his car, to Village Sappanwali. The complainant further stated that after reaching at the spot, he again made a phone call on the aforesaid number, which was given to him by the petitioner. Thereafter, four persons, having four bags along with them, stopped the complainant by giving a signal and told him that they had called him. As per the complainant, he recognized three of those four persons, who were stated to be Ravi Kumar (petitioner herein), Rishab Kumar @ Rishab Jakhar and Ajay Kumar @ Ajju and that he could also identify the fourth person, if brought before him. It was further MONIKA 2025.09.12 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) 3 alleged by the complainant that all the four persons sat in his car and when they reached near Village Giddrawali, one of the said four persons, namely Rishab Jakhar asked him to stop the car for two minutes to go to washroom. The complainant also got out from the car for using washroom, by taking the keys of car in his right hand. However, when the complainant went a little away from his car, then Rishab Jakhar snatched the key of car from the hand of complainant and pushed him, whereupon he fell down on the ground. Thereafter, all the four persons ran away along with the car of complainant. The complainant initially tried to find out his car at his own level but could not find it. It was alleged that mobile phone and wallet of the complainant containing his Aadhar Card, Driving License, PAN Card, ATM Card and an amount of Rs.4,200/- were also there in the car along with original RC and other documents of the car in the dashboard. As per the complainant, total amount of the material lying in the car was around Rs.5,00,000/-. On the basis of this statement, the FIR in question was registered. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that there is delay of about 24 hours in lodging the present FIR. No role has been attributed to the petitioner. Even the allegation of snatching keys of car is qua co-accused Rishab Jakhar. The petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case and recovery in the present case has already been effected. There is nothing to be recovered from the petitioner. He has further urged that trial of the case is likely to take time. Therefore, the petitioner be granted concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel, per contra, opposed the present bail petition and contended that apart from the present FIR, the petitioner has MONIKA 2025.09.12 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) 4 also been found involved in another FIR under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station City-1, Abohar. He is a habitual offender. In the present case also, the petitioner, in connivance with other co-accused, snatched the complainant’s car and used the same with fake number plate, before abandoning the same. So, keeping in view the serious allegations against the petitioner, he does not deserve the concession of bail. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file. As per the prosecution version, the petitioner, along with other co- accused, had snatched the Swift Dzire Car of the complainant. The aforesaid car had already been recovered in an abandoned condition. The other co- accused namely Rishab Kumar @ Rishab Jakhar and Ajay Kumar @ Ajju have already been granted concession of regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders passed on 08.08.2023. As per the Custody Certificate dated 09.09.2025, which has been placed on record today in the Court, the petitioner has already undergone custody of 04 months and 22 days. Trial of the case is going on, which is likely to take considerable time to conclude. So, no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be MONIKA 2025.09.12 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25858-2025 (O&M) 5 an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition. September 10, 2025 monika (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No. Whether reportable ? Yes/No. MONIKA 2025.09.12 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document