Satish Kumar v. State of U.T. Chandigarh CRM
Case Details
(cid:1) CRM-M-49150-2025 (O&M) 1 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 216 Satish Kumar Versus State of U.T. Chandigarh CRM-M-49150-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.09.2025 ....Petitioner ...Respondent
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. H.S. Chaddha, Advocate for the petitioner ***** Mr. Manish Bansal and Mr. Navnit Singh, P.P. for U.T. Chandigarh AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) ***** 1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.45 dated 24.03.2025, registered under Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act (Sections, 239, 255, 256, 337, 61(2), 319(2), 336(3) and 340(2) BNSS and Sections 7 and 13(2) of PC Act added later on) at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh. 2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for more than 5 months. He alleges false implication. Co-accused Jasminder Singh and Samunder, who were arrested along with him based on disclosure statement of Manish Kumar, have been granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 21.08.2025 and 29.08.2025, Annexures P-2 and P-3 respectively. In FIR No.128 dated 04.03.2025 registered against him in Police Station Badaut, District Bagpat, U.P., he was granted bail by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court on 02.07.2025 as had the above two co-accused. Challan was presented on 23.05.2025, however, the charges have not been framed. There are 22 prosecution witnesses in total. MOHIT 2025.09.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1) CRM-M-49150-2025 (O&M) 2 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382. 3. The custody certificate dated 09.09.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 5 months and 15 days. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that serious allegations have been leveled against the petitioner of planting a false case under Arms Act against Gaurav and Rocky, who were wanted in FIR in UP, so that they are able to take plea of not being involved in the other case. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case; the petitioner being on bail in other case and co-accused having been granted bail. 5. 6. Heard. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi (Supra)had held that, “As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court, etc.” Reiterating in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of UP and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, it was observed that, “The offence alleged no doubt is grave and serious and there are several criminal cases pending against the accused. These factors by themselves cannot be the basis for refusal of prayer for bail.” 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 5 months and 15 days; on bail in other case; co-accused have been granted bail; challan was presented on 23.05.2025, MOHIT 2025.09.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1) CRM-M-49150-2025 (O&M) 3 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) however, charges have not been framed and in all there are 32 witnesses, the trial (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed. 8. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court. (viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner. 9. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as MOHIT 2025.09.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1) CRM-M-49150-2025 (O&M) 4 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) granted to the petitioner by this order. (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) 10.
Decision
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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 09.09.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No MOHIT 2025.09.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document