Neshi v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-34469-2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 216 CRM-M-34469-2024 Date of decision: 17.07.2025 Naresh Kumar @ Neshi ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present : Mr. Manoj R. Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *****
Legal Reasoning
referring Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court has held that no doubt, at the time of granting bail, the criminal antecedents of the petitioner are to be looked into but at the same time it is equally true that the HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2024 6 appreciation of evidence during the course of trial has to be looked into with reference to the evidence in that case alone and not with respect to the evidence in the other pending cases. In such eventuality, strict adherence to the rule of denial of bail on account of pendency of other cases/convictions in all probability would land the petitioner in a situation of denial of the concession of bail. 5. Decision: In view of the aforesaid discussions made hereinabove, the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. However, it is made clear that anything stated hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The petition in the aforesaid terms stands allowed. 17.07.2025 Hemant (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Arguments
Mr. Rajiv Verma, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Mr. N.S. Lucky, Advocate for the complainant. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J.(ORAL) 1. Relief sought ***** This petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.165, dated 21.06.2023 under Sections 302, 148, 149 IPC, 1860 (offence under Sections 216 and 120-B IPC added lateron) registered at Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar Rural. 2. Contentions On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the name of the petitioner in this FIR was nominated on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Manpreet Singh @ Mani and Rohan Bains. The FIR was registered on 21.06.2023 and the petitioner was nominated as an accused on a statement made by the complainant, Vikas Kumar. It is also asserted on behalf of the petitioner that co-accused HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2024 2 Balwinder Singh @ Sonu was granted the concession of regular bail, on 26.04.2024 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. On behalf of the State 3. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing on advance notice, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. According to which, the petitioner is behind bars for 2 years and 19 days. Learned State Counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer concerned opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that petitioner along with his co-accused persons have committed the murder of one Gagandeep Singh. 4. Analysis From the above case it can be culled out that the petitioner has already suffered sufficient period in custody i.e. 2 years and 19 days and since framing of charges on 23.04.2024, no witness has been examined till date meaning thereby the trial is being delayed and for this, accused cannot be kept behind bars and further, as per the principle of the criminal jurisprudence, no one should be considered guilty, till the guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Reliance can be placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in “Dataram versus State of Uttar Pradesh and another”, 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that the grant of bail is a general rule and putting persons in jail or in prison or in correction home is an exception. Relevant paras of the said judgment is reproduced as under:- “2. A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2024 3 believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society. 3. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large number of decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the facts and in the circumstances of a case. 4. While so introspecting, among the factors that need to be considered is whether the accused was arrested during investigations when that person perhaps has the best opportunity to tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. If the investigating officer does not find it necessary to arrest an accused person during investigations, a strong case should be made out for placing that person in judicial custody after a charge sheet is filed. Similarly, it is important to ascertain whether the accused was participating in the investigations to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and was not absconding or not appearing when required by the investigating officer. Surely, if an accused is not hiding from the investigating officer or is hiding due to some genuine and expressed fear of being victimised, it would be a factor that a HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2024 4 judge would need to consider in an appropriate case. It is also necessary for the judge to consider whether the accused is a first-time offender or has been accused of other offences and if so, the nature of such offences and his or her general conduct. The poverty or the deemed indigent status of an accused is also an extremely important factor and even Parliament has taken notice of it by incorporating an Explanation to section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. An equally soft approach to incarceration has been taken by Parliament by inserting section 436A in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 5. To put it shortly, a humane attitude is required to be adopted by a judge, while dealing with an application for remanding a suspect or an accused person to police custody or judicial custody. There are several reasons for this including maintaining the dignity of an accused person, howsoever poor that person might be, the requirements of Article 21 of the Constitution and the fact that there is enormous overcrowding in prisons, leading to social and other problems as noticed by this Court in In Re-Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, 2017(4) RCR (Criminal) 416: 2017(5) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 408 : (2017) 10 SCC 658 6. The historical background of the provision for bail has been elaborately and lucidly explained in a recent decision delivered in Nikesh Tara chand Shah v. Union of India, 2017 (13) SCALE 609 going back to the days of the Magna Carta. In that decision, reference was made to Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565 in which it is observed that it was held way back in Nagendra v. King-Emperor, AIR 1924 Calcutta 476 that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. Reference was also made to Emperor v. Hutchinson, AIR 1931 Allahabad 356 wherein it was observed that grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception. The provision for bail is HAMANT 2025.07.17 21:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34469-2024 5 therefore age-old and the liberal interpretation to the provision for bail is almost a century old, going back to colonial days. 7. However, we should not be understood to mean that bail should be granted in every case. The grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner and compassionately. Also, conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.” Therefore, to elucidate further, this Court is conscious of the principle of law that right to speedy trial is a part of reasonable, fair and just procedure enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This constitutional right cannot be denied to the accused as is the mandate of the Apex court in “Hussainara Khatoon and ors (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna”, (1980) 1 SCC 98. Besides this, reference can be drawn upon that pre-conviction period of the under-trials should be as short as possible keeping in view the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant. As far as the pendency of other case and involvement of the petitioner in other case is concerned, reliance can be placed upon the order of this Court rendered in CRM-M-25914-2022 titled as “Baljinder Singh alias Rock vs. State of Punjab” decided on 02.03.2023, wherein, while