Punjab and Haryana High Court grants bail to man accused of raising ‘Pakistan zindabad’ slogan

While refraining from “commenting anything on the merits”, the court said, “Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, the court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of bail.”

Case

The man was accused of raising the slogan during the war between India and Pakistan. The prosecution had alleged that being a citizen of this country, an act of treason was committed by the man against the country.

After this, an FIR was registered against the accused under Sections 152 (acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India), 197D (makes or publishes false or misleading information jeopardising the sovereignty, unity and integrity or security of India) of BNS, 2023.

A Panchkula sessions court dismissed his bail plea, following which he moved the high court.

Arguments

Senior advocate Kshitij Sharma, and advocates Shobit Sharma, and Pragun Goyal, who represented the accused, submitted that the complainant in the case is the general secretary of bharatiya kisan sangh, Panchkula, Haryana and that the FIR was registered on due deliberations.

He further submitted that the accused has no criminal antecedents and the investigation is already complete.

Advocate Diya Sodhi, representing the State, argued that the allegations made were duly established during the investigation. She further submitted that only the challan has been presented so far and the charges are yet to be framed.

Decision

The court noted that according to the custody certificate the accused has suffered incarceration of a little over six months. It also noted that the accused is not involved in any other case and granted bail.

“Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case,” the order said.