##PAGE1##

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of

BNSS, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.166 dated 06.05.2020, registered at Police Station City Phagwara, District Kapurthala, under Sections 302, 323, 341, 326, 307, 148, 149,

120-B and 188 IPC.

2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 5 years, 10 months and 12 days. He alleges false implication. As per the allegations, he is stated to have caused injury on the left arm of the complainant, with handle of hand-pump, however, no specific injury has been attributed with regard to the deceased, as it has been stated that all co-accused gave injuries with their respective weapons by forming

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.27 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

unlawful assembly. Charges have been framed on 09.04.2021, 14 material witnesses, including the complainant, stand examined but there are still 12 more to go. He is involved in 2 more cases, in 1 of which he has

undergone the sentence and the other is pending trial.

3. The custody certificate, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 5 years,

10 months and 12 days.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the

, in which specific injury has

been attributed to him caused to the complainant. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner having undergone the sentence in 1 case and is facing trial in

the other.

5. Heard.

6. 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

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.27 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

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 years, 10 months and 12 days; facing trial in 1 more case; charges stand framed on 09.04.2021, however, 14 witnesses, including the complainant, have been examined, out of 26; the trial 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.

PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.27 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and i