[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vipan Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 21 April, 2026

                     CRM-M No.20235 of 2026                                                     -1-


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                            AT CHANDIGARH
                     253
                                                          *****

                                                                         CRM-M No.20235 of 2026
                                                                        Date of decision : 21.4.2026
                                                                       Date of uploading : 22.4.2026

                     Vipan Kumar                                               .............Petitioner
                                                           Versus
                     State of Punjab                                            .......Respondent

                     CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

                     Present: Mr. Kapil Khanna, Advocate, for the petitioner

                                Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab

                                ---

                     SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of

regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.199 dated 24.7.2023, under

Section 379-B(2) of IPC (Sections 411, 148, 149 of IPC added and

Sections 22 and 61 of NDPS Act deleted later on), registered at Police

Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar.

2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present

petition by the petitioner) is as follows:-

'I am a resident of the above address and am employed as an accountant at Loddowal Toll Plaza. I maintain all of the accounts of cash of toll plaza and I have been employed here for the last about three months. We deposit cash of toll plaza deposited every Monday and Friday at Punjab National Bank Phillaur where we have an account of our toll plaza. Today at ASHWANI KUMAR around 11:10 am, I along with our driver Anees, a resident of Rohtak, was

going to Phillaur to deposit cash totalling Rs 23 lakh 50 thousand of our toll plaza in vehicle make Bolero vehicle no. PB-10-JB-6865. We were about 100 yards short of Phillaur from Jalandhar bus stand, at about 11:20 a.m. a car make Breeza no. PB-36-J-9001 of white colour came from behind us and made us stop us forcibly. Two persons alighted from the vehicle, I rolled down the window pane and they asked us as to how we were driving. I was sitting on the conductor seat and they started manhandling me. Two more persons alighted from the vehicle and another person kept sitting on the driver's seat in that vehicle while engine of the car was kept running. I had kept the cash under my feet and three of them started snatching the bag containing cash from me. When I did not leave the bag containing cash, the an unknown person gave two blows with his danda on the inner side of joint of my left elbow and left wrist. hit me badly, hitting me on the inside of my knee joint and near my left wrist. One of the three said that I be shoot me and another person out of them brought out some thing from his "dubb" which lone could not see what it was, then I left the bag containing cash containing 23 lakhs 50,000 and all four of went away in the same car. All five people of them were clean shaven (mohnas). Two of those four had muffled their faces and two had not. I could not see the person who was as the driver's seat. Then both of us sat in our vehicle and returned to Toll Plaza. As I my left was in considerable pain, my driver Anees resident of Rohtak arranged for a conveyance and got me admitted in Civil Hospital Phillaur where the doctor Sahab prepared my MLR and discharged me and sent me home. Legal action should be taken against them. Statement has been made which has been read and heard over its contents which are correct. Sd/- Saudagar Singh attested by Harjinder Singh Inspector SHP Police Station Phillaur District Jalandhar (Rural) Dt. 24.07.2023.'

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner

is in custody since 27.7.2023. Learned counsel has argued that the

petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned

counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is a man aged 37 years.

Learned counsel has further argued that co-accused of the petitioner,

namely, Manpreet Sallan @ Monu and Vishal @ Lally, Gurjeet Singh @

Vicky and Kewal Krishan Mahey @ Kewal Krishan have been afforded

the concession of regular bail, vide orders dated 11.7.2025, 1.8.2025,

12.9.2025 and 10.9.2025 respectively. Learned counsel has further argued

that total 19 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but only 02 have been

examined till date; and the petitioner is languishing in gaol. Thus, regular

bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by

arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in

nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail.

Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated

20.4.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.

5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through

the available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 27.7.2023 whereinafter

investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 07.11.2023.

Total 19 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but only 02 have been

examined till date. It is not in dispute that co-accused, namely, Manpreet

Sallan @ Monu, Vishal @ Lally, Gurjeet Singh @ Vicky and Kewal

Krishan Mahey @ Kewal Krishan have already been granted concession

of regular bail, vide orders dated 11.07.2025, 1.08.2025, 12.9.2025 and

10.9.2025 respectively. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to

debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of

trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival

contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible

has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner

absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution

evidence.

6.1. As per custody certificate dated 20.4.2026 filed by the learned

State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period

of 2 years, 8 month and 18 days. As per the said custody certificate, the

petitioner is stated to be involved in 4 more FIRs. Indubitably, the

antecedents of a person are required to be accounted for while considering

a regular bail petition preferred by him. However, this factum cannot be a

ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the

petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of

regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the

facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed

upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd.

Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal)

586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in

case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments

of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State

of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana,

1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191.

Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial

is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.

7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is

ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds

to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However,

in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned

CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following

conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.