Bail should be granted unless compelling reasons exist to deny it, emphasizing judicial discretion and the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Anoop Chitkara, J. 

The petitioner, incarcerated upon his arrest in the FIR captioned above, has come before this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), seeking bail.

2. In paragraph 17 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. Petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

4. Facts of the case are being taken from reply dated 17.07.2024, which reads as follows:-

"That the brief facts of the case are that instant case, FIR No. 0422 dated 15.11.2023 under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC, P.S. Sector-36 Chandigarh, was registered on the basis of written complaint made by the Reader to the Court of Sh. Jaibir Singh, the then Learned Additional Session Judge, Chandigarh, wherein it was alleged that one person Talwinder Kumar appeared before the Ld. Court and tried to furnish his surety/bail bonds, affidavit, Aadhar Card of Talwinder and report pertaining to land valuation report issued by Halqa Patwari for grant of bail to accused Kapil involved in FIR No.98/2023 under section 397, 411 of IPC PS-34 and another person Nitin also identified him as Talwinder kumar before the Hon'ble Court. However, during verification, it found that the person presenting himself is not Talwinder Kumar and his original name is Balkrishan @ Aman. Thereafter, both the above said persons were detained and handed over to the police by the Court of Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Chandigarh and the instant FIR was registered against the accused persons. Bal Krishan @ Aman and Nitin were arrested from the court.

After registration of above said FIR, the investigation was put into motion. During the course of investigation, it came in the disclosure statement of the co-accused petitioner Bal Krishan @ Aman that he was allured by one Lucky, Sonu (present petitioner) and Billa and they asked him to appear as surety for accused Kapil in FIR no. 98/2023 under section 397,411of IPC PS-34 and they promised him to pay a sum of Rs. 3000/-. He further disclosed that the forged Aadhar card and property papers were also procured by them and subsequently he Balkrishan @ Aman and co-accused Nitin have submitted forged documents before the Court to get bail for above said accused Kapil."

5. Petitioner seeks bail on the ground of pre-trial custody and innocence. However, State opposes the bail by making reference to role of the petitioner as mentioned in the reply dated 17.07.2024, which reads as under:-

"That the present petitioner Arvind Kumar @ Sonu was arrested during the course of investigation of above said case which was lodged by the Reader of the Ld. Court as the accused persons tried to furnish surety/bail bonds on the basis of forged documents. The present petitioner allured the co-accused named Bal Krishan @ Aman and Nitin to appear as a fake surety and on the allurement of the present petitioner and other co-accused persons the do-accused Balkrishan @ Aman impersonated himself as Talwinder Kumar and was accompanied by co-accused Nitin who identified him as Talwinder Kumar for furnishing fake surety of accused Kapil who is involved in another case FIR No. 98/2023 Under Sections 397, 411 of IPC PS-34."

6. Although there is sufficient evidence connecting the petitioner with the offence but this Court is not considering framing of charges at this stage but is concerned for regular bail. As per paragraph 4 of the bail petition, the petitioner has been in custody since 06.01.2024 and accordingly the petitioner has undergone approximately 07 months of custody. Given the penal provisions invoked regarding pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other fact