S. No.222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

CRM-M-58866 of 2025 Date of Decision:12.11.2025 Swaran Singh alias Sonu .....Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present:- Ms. Arushi Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gorav Kathuria, DAG, Punjab.

****

Yashvir Singh Rathor, J. (Oral)

1. This is first petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C seeking concession of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.40 dated 24.02.2019 registered under Sections 379, 411, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, Punjab.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that a naka was laid on the basis of secret information that Gurpartap and Chamkaur Singh and petitioner – Swaran Singh @ Sonu, habitually commit thefts of motor-cycles and they sell the same after preparing the forged documents. Thereafter, Gurpartap was apprehended along with two stolen motor-cycles while petitioner and Chamkaur Singh allegedly fled away from the spot. In pursuance of his disclosure statement, Gurpartap got recovered eight more stolen motor-cycles on 24.02.2019. Co-

accused Chamkaur Singh was arrested on 24.02.2025 and petitioner was arrested on 20.03.2025 and challan has been presented after completion of investigation.

3. Status report by way of an affidavit of Shri Sukhwinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (City), District Feorzepur, has been filed on behalf of the respondent- State. The same is taken on record.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. No recovery was effected from him and all the ten stolen motor-cycles have been recovered from the possession of co-accused Gurpartap Singh. Now challan has already been presented. All the offences are Magisterial trial. The trial will take sufficiently long time to conclude and his further detention is not required and he may be released on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail and sought its dismissal in view of gravity of offence and the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender. However, in the status report, it has been mentioned that only two trials are pending against the present petitioner at this stage.

7. Petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2025. He had allegedly succeeded in fleeing away when police party laid a naka and had apprehended co-

possession of petitioner. Investigation has already been completed and challan has

been presented. All the offences are Magisterial trial. The trial will take

sufficiently long time to conclude and his further detention is not required and he deserves to be released on bail.

8. Having regard to the aforesaid factual position, but without commenting anything upon the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions.

(Yashvir Singh Rathor)

Judge November 12, 2025 renu Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No