Vishal Kumar Alias Shalu vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 250 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vishal Kumar Alias Shalu vs State Of Punjab on 15 January, 2026

                                Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS

                    is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.
                                                                               No.08 dated

                    28.01.2025, registered at Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar, under

                    Sections 127(4), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 341(1) BNS.

                    2.          Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in

                    custody for 11 months and 12 days. He alleges false implication. The

                    allegation against him is of running a drug de
                                                                de-addiction centre without

                    any licence where 15 young persons had been admitted. Charges have

                    been framed on 28.05.2025, however, none out of 25 PWs has been

                    examined. The petitioner is involved in one more case under the NDPS

                    Act wherein he is on bail. Reliance
                                                 liance is placed on the judgment passed by

PARVEEN KUMAR
2026.01.15 19:16
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this
order/judgment.
                     Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs.

                    State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382.

                    3.           The custody certificate dated 14.01.2026, filed by the learned

                    State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind

                    bars for 11 months and 12 days.

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

                    there are specific allegations against the petitioner of running a illegal

                    drug de-addiction centre from where 15 persons were got released.

                    However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage

                    of the case and the petitioner being on bail in other case.

                    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."

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in

particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 12

days; on bail in other case; charges stand framed on 28.05.2025; the

prosecution evidence has to commence; in all there are 25 PWs; 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.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

9. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of

the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation

of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

10. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations

made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and

would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the

trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.