Karan Kumar Alias Chirri vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 3970 P&H

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3970 P&H
Judgement Date : 29 April, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Karan Kumar Alias Chirri vs State Of Punjab on 29 April, 2026

                      CRM-M-11413-2026                                                         -1-




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                              AT CHANDIGARH

                      213                             CRM-M-11413-2026
                                                      Date of decision: 29th April, 2026
                      Karan Kumar @ Chirri
                                                                                         ...Petitioner
                                                          Versus
                      State of Punjab
                                                                                       ...Respondent

                      CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

                      Present:     Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
                                   Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
                                         ***

MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL):-

The petitioner is seeking concession of regular bail in case

bearing FIR No. 39 dated 15.03.2023 registered under Sections 379-B of IPC

(Sections 489 of IPC added later on) at Police Station City Patti, District Tarn

Taran.

2. As per the allegations, on 15.03.2023, two motorcyclists had

snatched a mobile phone from the complainant Boota Singh and escaped.

During the course of investigation, accused Arshdeep Singh and Anmol Singh

were apprehended on the basis of some secret information and snatched

mobile was recovered from the accused Arshdeep Singh, which was identified

by the complainant. On interrogation, the accused Arshdeep Singh suffered a

disclosure statement to the effect that he had committed the offence at the

instance of the present petitioner. The petitioner was nominated as accused

and was arrested. He was extended benefit of bail vide order dated 15.05.2023

passed by learned Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran. He failed to appear

subsequently due to which his bail was cancelled, and bonds were forfeited to

the State vide order dated 18.09.2025. Proceedings declaring him as a

proclaimed person were initiated and he was declared as such vide order dated

13.11.2025. He was arrested on 03.12.2025 and is in custody since then.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that his absence

was not intentional as after presentation of challan though notices and then

bailable warrants were issued against him but the same were never received

by him due to not having any information about the presentation of challan.

He could not appear before the learned trial Court. He has remained in custody

for a period of over 07 months. No useful purpose would be served by

detaining him in custody anymore. The trial will take considerable time to

conclude. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that keeping in view

the gravity of the allegations, the fact that petitioner has criminal antecedents

and further that there are chances of his absconding again, he does not deserve

to be extended benefit of bail. Therefore, it is stressed that the petition does

not deserve to be allowed.

5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned

counsel for the parties at considerable length.

6. The petitioner had previously been extended benefit of bail. Now

he has been in custody for a period of about 07 months. Previously, also he

had remained in custody. There are no chances of conclusion of trial in near

future. It is well settled proposition of law that pre-trial incarceration should

not be a replica of post-conviction sentence. In view of the above discussed

facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out

2026.04.30 09:43 a case for release on bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal

as well as surety bonds of two sureties to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial

Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.

7. However, in addition to the conditions to be imposed by the

learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, the release of

the petitioner shall also be subject to the following conditions :

(i) he shall not absent himself on any date before the learned trial Court;

(ii) he shall deposit his passport, if any, with the learned trial Court;

(iii) he shall give the details of his mobile numbers at the police station concerned and shall not change the same without prior permission of the Court;