Bikramjit Singh Alias Vicky Alias World v. State of Punjab

o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 1o o INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoPUNJABoANDoHARYANAoATo CHANDIGARHo o 249o o o o o o o ooooooCRM-M-10207-2025o Dateoofodecision:o27.03.2025o BikramjitoSingho@oVickyo@oWorldooooo o o o o o o o o o o ....Petitionerooo V/so StateoofoPunjaboo o o o o o o o o o ....Respondento o CORAM:oo HON'BLEoMR.oJUSTICEoSUMEEToGOELo Present:oo Mr.oAmitoArora,oAdvocateoforotheopetitioner.oo o o Mr.oI.S.oLadher,oDAGoPunjab.oooo oo *****o SUMEEToGOEL,oJ.o(Oral)oo

1.o o TheoinstantopetitionoisotheothirdopetitionounderoSectiono483oofo BNSS,o2023oforograntooforegularobailotootheopetitioneroinocaseobearingoFIRo No.175o datedo 27.09.2019,o registeredo foro theo offenceso punishableo undero Sectionso 21,o 22,o 29o ofo theo NDPSo Acto ando Sectiono 25o ofo theo Armso Acto (offenceounderoSectionso25oofoNDPSoActoandoSectionso420,o465,o468,o471o ando120-BoofoIPCoandoSectiono12oofotheoPassportoAct,o1920oaddedolateroon)oato PoliceoStationoSadaroKapurthala,oDistrictoKapurthala.oo

2.o o TheocaseosetoupoinotheoFIRoinoquestiono(asosetooutoinotheopresento petitionobyotheopetitioner)oisoasofollows:-o "SHOoPoliceoStationoSadaroKapurthalao"JaioHind"otodayo1oSIoalongowitho ASIo Purano Chando No.397/Kapurthalao ASIo Tarsemo Singho No.868/Kapurthalao HCo Mangato Ramo No.880o HCo Lakhviro Singho No.305/?ΡΤo?ΤoKuldeepoSingho886owereoonopatrollingodutyoinosearchoofo anti-socialoelementsoonoprivateovehicleoalongowitholaptopoprinteroandowereo goingofromoPoliceoStationoSadaroKapurthalaotoovillageoSaidowal,oBhandalo Dauna,o Sidhwao Daunao etc.o ando wheno Policeo partyo whileo patrollingo reachedo ato ao littleo distanceo aheado ofo villageo Saidowalo theno theo secreto informerosignalledomeoSIotoostopomyovehicleoandoafterogettingomyovehicleoAJAYgKUMAR 2025.03.28g13:58 Igattestgtogthegaccuracygand stoppedotookomeotoooneosideoandogaveotheoinformationothatoVikramjeeto integritygofgthisgdocument o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 2o o Singh alias Vicky alias World son of Balwinder Singh alias Billa resident of Mohalla Guru Ka Khuh Maharaja Ranjit Singh School Wali Gali near Dhoda Chowki Tarn Taran Police Station City Tarn Taran and Gurpreet Singh son of Harjit Singh resident of House No.361 Aman Nagar Mohalla Near Chuhad Wal Chungi Police Station City Kapurthala District Kapurthala and that Vikramjeet Singh alias Vicky alias World is the smuggler of selling intoxicants and against him already many cases stands registered for committing heinous crimes and for keeping intoxicant substances and illegal arms and today also both of the aforesaid young person on 1 20 car bearing No.PB02D5V56641 white in colour are coming from Kulara side towards Kapurthala and in case at this time after setting up the naka at London Palace Bhandal Dauna Road and the checking of the vehicles got conducted then both these young person can be got apprehended with intoxicant substance and illegal weapons. Since the said information is truthful and reliable as such the offences under Section 21, 22, 29, 61, 85 of NDPS Act and 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act is made out, thus, after writing the Ruqa the same is being sent to the Police Station for registration of case against the aforesaid person by hand Constable Kuldeep Singh No.886. After registering the case the FIR number be informed. Control room be informed. After issuing the special reports the senior officials be informed. I SI along with other officials is going to the spot for setting up the naka at London Palace Bhandal Dauna Road. Sd./5 Avtar Singh SI Police Station Sadar Kapurthala dated 27.09.2019 today within the jurisdiction of village Saidowal 5:50 PM." #.o o 3earnedocounseloforotheo-etitionerohasoarguedothatotheo-etitionero hasobeenofalselyoim-licatedointootheo7+8oino:uestion.oo3earnedocounselohaso furtherosubmittedothatonooreco2ery oasoallegedoinotheo-rosecutionocase o;aso effectedofromotheo-etitioneroandotheosameoisoinofactobeeno-lantedou-onohim.o 3earnedo counselo haso furthero submittedo thato theo mandatoryo -ro2isionso ofo N'PSo(ct o1.<%oha2eonotobeenocom-liedo;ith.oo+tohasobeenofurtherourgedothato 8uleo==oofoN'PSo(cto-ermitsoao-ersonotoocarryoBu-renor-hineo+njectionso andothusonoooffenceounderotheoN'PSo(ctoisomadeooutoagainstotheo-etitioner.o 3earnedocounselohasofurtheroarguedothatonoo-ro-eroinde-endento;itnesso;aso o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 3o o everoenjoinedoinotheocaseoandonooplausibleoexplanationohasobeenorenderedoforo non-joiningoofosuchoindependentowitness.ooLearnedocounseloforotheopetitionero hasofurtheroreferred,oinoextenso,otootheozimni/interimoordersopassedobyotheo trialoCourtoono04.07.2024,o06.08.2024,o20.08.2024,o10.09.2024,o30.09.2024,o

16.10.2024,o 19.12.2024o ando 13.01.2025o too argueo thato thereo iso inordinateo delayo ino culminationo ofo theo trialo ando theo sameo iso noto attributableo too theo petitioner.ooItohasobeenofurtherourgedothatovideoorderodatedo24.07.2024opassedo inoCRM-M-34958-2024,othisoCourto(whileodealingowithotheobailopetitionoono behalfoofotheoco-accusedonamelyoGurmeetoSinghoBadwal)ohadodirectedotheo trialoCourtotooexpediteotheotrialobutotoonooavail.ooInothisoviewoofotheomatter,o learnedocounselohasoprayedoforograntooforegularobail.oo

4.o o LearnedoStateocounselohasoopposedotheopresentopetitionoarguingo thatotheoallegationsoraisedoareoseriousoinonatureoandotheopetitionerodoesonoto deserveo theo concessiono ofo theo regularo bail.o o o Learnedo Stateo counselo haso furtherosubmittedothatotheoFIRoinoquestionopertainsotoorecoveryoofo100omloofo contrabandonamelyoBuprenorphineoalongwithoaopistolo(withoutomake)oando fiveoliveocartridgesoofo7.65oKF.ooItohasothusobeenourgedothatotheorecoveryoofo theocontrabandopertainsotoocommercialoquantityoand,otherefore,otheobaroundero Sectiono37oofotheoNDPSoAct,o1985oisoattracted.ooLearnedoStateocounselohaso filedo custodyo certificateo 26.03.2025o ino Courto todayo ando reliedo upono theo involvementoofotheopetitioneroinomultipleootherocases.ooHeohas,oaccordinglyo soughtoforodismissaloofotheopetitionoinohand.oo

5.o o Iohaveoheardocounseloforotheopartiesoandohaveogoneothroughotheo availableorecordsoofotheocase.oo AJAYgKUMAR 2025.03.28g13:58 Igattestgtogthegaccuracygand integritygofgthisgdocument o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 4o o

6.o o Theo petitionero waso arrestedo ono 27.09.2019o whereinaftero investigationowasocarriedooutoandochallanostandsopresentedoono20.03.2020.oo Chargeso ino theo caseo wereo framedo ono 07.07.2022.o Totalo 25o prosecutiono witnessesohaveobeenocited,ooutoofowhichoonlyo13ohaveobeenoexaminedotillo date.oTheorivalocontentionoofolearnedocounseloforotheoparties;oasotoowhethero theocontrabandoandofirearm/cartridgesoinoquestionohaveobeenoplantedouponotheo petitioner,owhetherotheomandatoryoprovisionsoofotheoNDPSoAct,o1985ohaveo beenocompliedowitho&oasotoowhetherotheopetitionerowasopermittedotoocarryo Buprenorphine;o areo issueso ofo contentiouso natureo whicho areo essentiallyo requiredotoobeoratiocinatedouponoduringotheocourseoofotrial.oThisoCourtodoeso notodeemoitoappropriateotoodelveodeepointootheseorivalocontentions,oatothiso stage,o lesto ito mayo prejudiceo theo trial.o Nothingo tangibleo haso beeno broughto forwardo too indicateo theo likelihoodo ofo theo petitionero abscondingo fromo theo processoofojusticeoorointerferingowithotheoremainingoprosecutionoevidence.oo o o Ato thiso juncture,o ito wouldo beo germaneo too refero hereino too ao judgmentopassedobyothisoCourtotitledoasoKulwinderovs.oStateoofoPunjabo?o Neutralo Citationo No.:o ?o 2025:PHHC:002695;o relevanto whereofo readso aso under:o o"7.o o Thereoisoanotheroaspectonayovitaloaspectoofotheomatteroino handowhichocravesoforoattentionoofothisoCourt.o o

7.1.o o Longoback,oinoHussainaraoKhatoonovs.oHomeoSecy.,oStateo ofoBiharoreportedoaso(1980)o1oSCCo81,otheoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtohado declaredothatotheorightotoospeedyotrialoofooffendersofacingocriminalochargeso iso"implicitoinotheobroadosweepoandocontentoofoArticleo21oasointerpretedobyo thisoCourt".ooRemarkingothatoaovalidoprocedureounderoArticleo21oisooneo whichocontainsoaoprocedureothatoiso"reasonable,ofairoandojust"oitowasoheldo that:o o"Nowoobviouslyoprocedureoprescribedobyolawoforodeprivingoaopersonoofo AJAYgKUMAR 2025.03.28g13:58 libertyocannotobeo"reasonable,ofairoorojust"ounlessothatoprocedureoensureso Igattestgtogthegaccuracygand integritygofgthisgdocument o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 5o o a speedy trial for determination of the guilt of such person. No procedure which does not ensure a reasonably quick trial can be regarded as "reasonable, fair or just" and it would fall foul of Article 21. There can, therefore, be no doubt that speedy trial, and by speedy trial we mean reasonably expeditious trial, is an integral and essential part of the fundamental right to life and liberty enshrined in Article 21. The question which would, however, arise is as to what would be the consequence if a person accused of an offence is denied speedy trial and is sought to be deprived of his liberty by imprisonment as a result of a long delayed trial in violation of his fundamental right under Article 21."

7.2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as (&$ulo 'ehmano(ntulayovso'.S.oNaya)oreported as (1992) 1 SCC 225 has re5 emphasized the right to speedy trial, and further held that an accused, facing prolonged trial, has no option: "The State or complainant prosecutes him. It is, thus, the obligation of the State or the complainant, as the case may be, to proceed with the case with reasonable promptitude. Particularly, in this country, where the large majority of accused come from poorer and weaker sections of the society, not versed in the ways of law, where they do not often get competent legal advice, the application of the said rule is wholly inadvisable. Of course, in a given case, if any accused demands speedy trial and yet he is not given one, may be a relevant factor in his favour. But we cannot disentitle an accused from complaining of infringement of his right to speedy trial on the ground that he did not ask for or insist upon a speedy trial. "

7.3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment tiled as 0ave$o *ulamoNa&ioShai)hovs.oStateoo!o+aharashtraoan$oanother o202,-./o'C'o -Ciminal/o,9, has held as under: "18. Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. This humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may be social and economic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with indigence or other privations.

¶189If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court 2025.03.28 13:58 concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 1o o of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime.

¶20We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; not a convict. The over5arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be.

¶21We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecuting agency as well as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article 21 of the Constitution."

7.4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court; while dealing with a bail plea in respect of a case under NDPS Act pertaining to commercial quantity contraband; in a judgment titled as +oh$o+uslimo3oHussainovs.oStateo -NC1oo!o2elhi/oreported as 2023 INSC 311, has observed as under: "21. Before parting, it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. Jails are overcrowded and their living conditions, more often than not, appalling. According to the Union Home Ministry's response to Parliament, the National Crime Records Bureau sthad recorded that as on 31 December 2021, over 5,54,034 prisoners were lodged in jails against total capacity of 4,25,068 lakhs in the country. Of these 122,852 were convicts; the rest 4,27,165 were undertrials.

¶22The danger of unjust imprisonment, is that inmates are at risk of "prisonisation' a term described by the Kerala High Court in A Convict Prisoner vs. State reported in 1993 Cri LJ 3242, as a "a radical transformation" whereby the prisoner: "loses his identity. He is known by a number. He loses personal possessions. He has no personal relationships. Psychological problems result from loss of freedom, status, possessions, dignity any autonomy of personal life. The inmate culture of prison turns out to be dreadful. The prisoner becomes hostile by ordinary standards. Self5perception changes."

¶23There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, "as crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more 2025.03.28 13:58 honour is paid to the criminal" (also see Donald Clemmer's 'The Prison o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 7o o Community' published in 1940). Incarceration has further deleterious effect 5 where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials – especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily."

7.5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court; in a bail plea under NDPS Act pertaining to commercial quantity; in Criminalo(88ealoNo.2,5:2020o $ate$o04.02.2020otitled as "Chittao"is#aso(liasoSu&hasovs.o1heoStateoo!o 5esto"en6al7 has held as under:5 "Leave granted. This appeal arises out of the final Order dated 30.7.2010 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in CRM No.6787 of 2019. The instant matter arises out of application preferred by the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail in connection with Criminal Case No.146 of 2018 registered with Taherpur Police Station for offence punishable under Section 215C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. According to the prosecution, the appellant was found to be in possession of narcotic substance i.e. 46 bottles of phensydryl cough syrup containing codeine mixture above commercial quantity. The appellant was arrested on 21.07.2018 and continues to be in custody. It appears that out of 10 witnesses cited to be examined in support of the case of prosecution four witnesses have already been examined in the trial. Without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the rival submissions and considering the facts and circumstances on record, in our view, case for bail is made out."

7.6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court; in a bail plea under NDPS Act pertaining to commercial quantity; titled as "Nitisho ($hi)aryo 3o "a8ano9s.o1heoStateoo!o5esto"en6al7 has held as under:5 "As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered appearance on their o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 2o o The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No.612 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal. During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07 months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as only one witness has been examined. The petitioner does not have criminal antecedents. Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court."

7.7. To the similar effect is the ratio decidendi of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S8ecialo>eaveotoo(88ealo-Crl./oNo.55.0@ 2022odated 22.08.20223 titled as ?+ohamma$oSalmanoHani!oShai)hovs.o 1heo Stateo o!o *u%arat7;o Criminalo (88ealo No.;;69o o!o 2022o dated

05.08.2022 titled as *o8aloKrishnaoPatrao3o*o8alrusmao9s.o<nionoo!o =n$ia and (n)uroChau$haryovs.oStateoo!o+a$hyaoPra$esho202,-,/o'C'o -Criminal/o;42o

7.8. The right to a speedy and expeditious trial is not only a vital safeguard to prevent undue and oppressive incarceration; to mitigate anxiety and concern accompanying the accusation as well as to curtail any impairment in the ability of an accused to defend himself, but there is an overarching societal interest paving way for a speedy trial. This right has been repeatedly actuated in the recent past and the ratio decidendi of the above5referred to Supreme Court's judgments have laid down a series of decisions opening up new vistas of fundamental rights. The concept of speedy trial is amalgamated into the Article 21 as an essential part of the fundamental right to life and liberty, guaranteed and preserved under our Constitution. The right to speedy trial begins with the actual restraint imposed at the time of the arrest of the accused and consequent incarceration which continues at all stages, namely, the stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal and revision so that any possible prejudice that may result due to impermissible and avoidable delay since the time of the commission of the offence till the criminal proceedings consummate into a finality, could be averted. The speedy trial, early hearing and quick disposal are sine qua non of criminal jurisprudence. 2025.03.28 13:58 The overcrowded Court5dockets, the heavy volume of work and the o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 9o o resultant pressure on the prosecution and the Police, indubitably keeps the entire criminal jurisprudential mechanism under stress and strain. However, this cannot be an excuse for keeping the sword of Damocles hanging on the accused for an indefinite period of time. It does not serve any credit to the criminal justice system, rather it makes for a sad state of affairs. The guarantee of a speedy trial is intended to avoid oppression and prevent delay by imposing on the Court and the prosecution an obligation to proceed with the trial with a reasonable dispatch. The guarantee serves a threefold purpose. Firstly, it protects the accused against oppressive pre5trial imprisonment; secondly, it relieves the accused of the anxiety and public suspicion due to unresolved criminal charges and lastly, it protects against the risk that evidence will be lost or memories dimmed by the passage of time, thus, impairing the ability of the accused to defend himself. It goes without saying that the consequences of pre5trial detention are grave. Accused, presumed innocent, till proven otherwise, are subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail5 life, usually under onerous conditions. Equally important, the burden of detention of such an accused frequently falls heavily on the innocent members of his family. There is yet another aspect of the matter which deserves consideration at this stage. The allegations in the present case relate to accused being involved in an FIR relating to commercial quantity of contraband under the NDPS Act, 1985. While considering a bail petition in a case involving commercial quantity, the Court has to keep in mind the rigours enumerated under Section 37 of NDPS Act, 1985 which mandates that Courts can grant bail to an accused only after hearing the public prosecutor and after having satisfied itself of twin conditions which are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence charged/alleged and that, he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The stringent rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 must be meticulously scrutinized against the backdrop of accused's fundamental right to a speedy trial. The right to life and personal liberty cannot be rendered nugatory by unwarranted delays in the judicial process, particularly where such delay(s) is neither attributable to the accused nor justified at the end of the prosecution by cogent reasons. An individual cannot be kept behind bars for an inordinate period of time by taking refuge in rigours laid down in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The legislature in its wisdom, in order to ensure speedy and timely 2025.03.28 13:58 disposal of the cases under the Act, has provided for the constitution of o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 10o o special Courts under Section 365A of the Act. However, this Court cannot turn Nelson's eye to the protracted delays and systematic inefficiency that frustrate this legislative purpose. A Court of law is duty5bound to ensure that it does not become complicit in violation of an individual's fundamental rights, notwithstanding anything contained in a statute. While dealing with bail petition in a case governed by the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, the Court must strike a judicious balance between the legislative intent to curb the menace of drugs and the sacrosanct right of the accused to a fair and expeditious trial. Prolonged incarceration, without justifiable cause, risks transforming pre5trial detention into punitive imprisonment, an outcome antithetical to the principle of justice and equity. Ergo, the unequivocal inference is that where the trial has failed to conclude within a reasonable time, resulting in prolonged incarceration, it militates against the precious fundamental rights of life and liberty granted under the law and, as such, conditional liberty overriding the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 ought to be considered as per facts of a given case. In other words, grant of bail in a case pertaining to commercial quantity, on the ground of undue delay in trial, cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985." o o 8e2ertingotootheocaseoinohandAoaso-erocustodyocertificateodatedo !=."#.!"!%ofiledobyolearnedoStateocounsel otheo-etitionerohasoalreadyosufferedo incarcerationoforoao-eriodoofomoreothano"%oyears o")omonthsoando1.odays.oo(o -erusalo ofo theo @imnio orderso datedo ")."$.!"!) o "=."<.!"!) o !"."<.!"!) o 1"."..!"!) o#"."..!"!) o1=.1".!"!) o1..1!.!"!)oando1#."1.!"!%oindicateso thato theo trialo iso -rocrastinating o conclusiono thereofo iso noto 2isibleo ino nearo futureo ando theo delayo ino culminationo thereofo cannoto beo attributedo too theo -etitioner.oo+nofact oao-erusaloofotheosaido@imnioorderso;ouldoindicateothatotheo Policeohasosho;noaocom-leteolacklusteroattitudeoinocoo-eratingo;ithotheoearlyo o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 11o o o o Theo firsto petitiono foro granto ofo regularo bailo preferredo byo theo petitionero waso dismissedo ono 09.03.2022o followedo byo theo dismissalo ofo ao subsequento bailo petitiono ono 05.07.2024.o o Ino lighto ofo theo prolongedo incarcerationoofotheopetitioner,othisoCourtohad,oono05.07.2024,ohadodirectedo theotrialoCourtotooexpediteotheoproceedingsoforoanoexpeditiousoconclusion.oo Evidently,otheopetitionerohasoenduredoanoextendedoperiodoofocustodyosinceotheo dismissaloofobothotheobailopetitions.ooMoreover,odespiteotheodirectionoofothiso Courtotooconcludeotheotrialoexpeditiously,othereoappearsotoobeolittleotangibleo progressotowardsotheosame.ooTheoprotractedonatureoofotheoproceedingsonoto onlyofrustratesotheomandateoofoaofairoandospeedyotrialobutoalsooraisesoconcernso abouto theo efficacyo ofo judicialo directiveso ino ensuringo timelyo justice.o Indubitably,othereoisoextendedocustodyoofotheopetitionerosinceotheodismissaloofo theofirstoasowelloasosecondobailopetition.oo o o Theolongoinordinateocustodyoofotheopetitioneroasoanoundertrial,o withoutohimobeingoresponsibleoforoprocrastinationoofotheotrial,oentitlesohimotoo grantoofotheoregularobailoinotheofactualomatrixoofotheocaseoinohand.ooo o o Sufficeotoosay,ofurtherodetentionoofotheopetitioneroasoanoundertrialo isonotowarrantedoinotheofactsoandocircumstancesoofotheocase.ooo

7.o o Inoviewoofoabove,otheopresentopetitionoisoallowed.oPetitioneroiso orderedotoobeoreleasedoonoregularobailoonohisofurnishingobail/suretyobondsotoo theo satisfactiono ofo theo Ld.o concernedo CJM/Dutyo Magistrate.o However,o ino additiono too conditionso thato mayo beo imposedobyo theo concernedo CJM/Dutyo Magistrate,otheopetitioneroshalloremainoboundobyotheofollowingoconditions:-o o (i)oo Theopetitioneroshallonotomis-useotheolibertyogranted.oo o (ii)oo Theopetitioneroshallonototamperowithoanyoevidence,ooralo AJAYgKUMAR 2025.03.28g13:58 o orodocumentary,oduringotheotrial.oo Igattestgtogthegaccuracygand integritygofgthisgdocument o o CRM-M-10207-2025o o o o o o 12o o o (iii)oo Theo petitionero shallo noto absento himselfo ono anyo dateo o beforeotheotrial.oo o (iv)oo Theo petitionero shallo noto commito anyo offenceo whileo o onobail.oo o (v)oo Theopetitioneroshallodepositohisopassport,oifoany,oowitho o theotrialoCourt.oo o (vi)oo Theo petitionero shallo giveo hiso cellphoneo numbero too o theo Investigatingo Officer/SHOo ofo concernedo Policeo o Stationo ando shallo noto changeo hiso cell-phoneo numbero o withouto prioro permissiono ofo theo trialo Court/Illaqao o Magistrate.o o (vii)oo Theo petitionero shallo noto ino anyo mannero tryo too delayo o theotrial.oo

8.o o Inocaseoofobreachoofoanyoofotheoaforesaidoconditionsoandothoseo whicho mayo beo imposedo byo concernedo CJM/Dutyo Magistrateo aso directedo hereinaboveo oro upono showingo anyo othero sufficiento cause,o theo State/complainanto shallo beo ato libertyo too moveo cancellationo ofo bailo ofo theo petitioner.oo

9.oo o Orderedoaccordingly.oo

10.o o Nothingosaidohereinaboveoshallobeoconstruedoasoanoexpressionoofo opinionoonotheomeritsoofotheocase.oo

11.oo o Sinceotheomainocaseohasobeenodecided,opendingomiscellaneouso application,oifoany,oshalloalsoostandsodisposedooff.o o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooo(SUMEEToGOEL)o o ooooooooooooooooo o o ooooooooooooooooooooo ooo o o oooJUDGEo o Marcho27,o2025o Ajayo o o o o Whetherospeaking/reasoned:o o Yes/Noo AJAYgKUMAR 2025.03.28g13:58 Igattestgtogthegaccuracygando o Whetheroreportable:o o o Yes/Noo integritygofgthisgdocument