IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-25.08.2025 Bharat Kalyan ......Petitioner.

Vs.

State of Punjab ......Respondent.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present:- Mr. Abhishek Khullar, Advocate with Mr. Pragun Marwaha, Advocate and Mr. Lovepreet Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, AAG Punjab.

***

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL The Prayer in this petition under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.52 dated 29.03.2023 under Sections 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station City Batala, District Batala.

2. As per the allegations in the FIR when checking was started by the police on the basis of secret information Sudhir Sibbal along with Harpreet Singh were intercepted. Harpreet Singh got recovered one 32 bore pistol with 02 live cartridges. Sudhir Simbal got recovered one 32 bore pistol and 03 live cartridges. On the basis of disclosure statement of Sudhir Simbal, petitioner came to be nominated as an accused.

3. The Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. No recovery has been effected from him. Though he is an accused in other cases, the said fact would not disentitle him to the concession of bail. The accused arrested in the present case from whom the recovery of weapons has been effected have already been granted the concession of bail. He is otherwise in custody since 19.10.2024 but only 01 of the 11 Pws has been examined so far which would further cause delay in conclusion of the Trial. Therefore he is entitled to the concession of bail.

4. The Counsel for the State contends that the petitioner is an accused in 03 other cases. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail. He however, concedes that two accused of the petitioner have been granted the concession of bail, that the petitioner is in custody since

19.10.2024 and that only 01 of the 11 Pws have been examined so far.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. Admittedly, two co-accused of the petitioner from whom the recovery of the weapon has been effected have been granted the concession of bail. The petitioner is stated to be named in the disclosure statement of his co-accused. No recovery has been effected from him. He is in custody since 19.10.2024 but only 01 of the 11 Pws has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded in the near future. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required.

7. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Bharat Kalyan son of Sh. Jatinder Kalyan is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

8. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other that the cases mentioned in this order.

9. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.25,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioners from trial without sufficient cause.

10. The petitions stand disposed of.

( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )

JUDGE August 25, 2025 Vinay