301/307 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 04.03.2025 Parminder Singh Alias Cheena ........Petitioner(s)

Versus State Of Punjab ........Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. R.K. Grewal Advocate and Ms. Amardeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

***

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (Oral)

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

98 28.5.2024 City Rajpura, District Patiala 22 NDPS Act

1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC, seeking regular bail.

2. During the pendency of the bail petition, the petitioner has also filed an application i.e. CRM-8674-2025, seeking interim bail to the petitioner on account of marriage of brother of the petitioner, which is fixed from 5.3.2025 to 6.3.2025.

3. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the denial of interim bail would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family. Petitioner's counsel has no objection to imposing any stringent conditions in case of grant of interim bail.

4. In paragraph 9 of the petition, the petitioner states that he has no criminal antecedents.

5. In paragraph 5 of the application, it is mentioned that marriage of brother namely Harpreet Singh is fixed from 5.3.2025 to 6.3.2025 and being brother, he has to perform certain rituals.

6. While opposing the interim bail, the State’s counsel, on instructions from SI Jarnail Singh, does not dispute the factum of the wedding of petitioner’s brother, the grounds on which the petitioner is seeking interim bail.

REASONING:

7. A prisoner should not be ordinarily denied the opportunity of attending a significant family event merely because the immediate relatives, in addition to friends and the neighbors, have become accustomed to usually caring for the family members of a person under incarceration and the family is not dependant on the prisoner. The prisoner himself not only longs for presence, cooperation, support, and even financial help of the family but is also expected by the near and dears in return for their support towards his family to reciprocate by attending their sacrosanct family functions, despite such attendance carrying the risk of social boycott or dejection.

8. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for limited period interim bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court’s official webpage.

9. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, he shall be released on interim bail w.e.f. 05.03.2025 to 10.03.2025 in the FIR captioned above, subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability, before any nearest Illaqa Magistrate

10. The petitioner shall not influence, browbeat, pressurize, make any inducement, threat, or promise, directly or indirectly, to the witnesses, the police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and the circumstances of the case, to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the police, or the court, or to tamper with the evidence.

11. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

11. In return for the limited protection from incarceration, the Court believes that the accused shall also reciprocate through desirable behavior. It is clarified that in case the petitioner does not mend his ways and repeats the offence or indulge in criminal behaviour, then in all future matters, the concerned courts shall keep it as a factor that this court had cautioned the petitioner to reform and live a normal