IN THE 241 Ajay Singh State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Section 302 of Bharatiya Nyaya 2. Learned that the FIR in the Devi, maternal aunt has alleged that and he had allegedly 3. Counsel of the case being grant of bail on submitted that the already undergone further submits that witnesses cited by THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19505 Date of decision: VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . AVS Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Paras Talwar, Sr. DAG, Haryana ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant second petition has been Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.538 dated the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] at Police Station Learned counsel appearing on behalf the present case has been registered aunt of the petitioner’s wife i.e. the petitioner was having estranged allegedly given brick blows on her head, Counsel for the petitioner contends that being for or against the petitioner, at on the ground of long incarceration the petitioner was taken into custody undergone an actual custody of more than that the conclusion of trial shall take by the prosecution has been examined PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 19505-2026 (O&M) decision: 17.04.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ petitioner. Haryana. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 02.09.2020 registered under [now Section 103(1) of the Station Palla, District Faridabad. behalf of the petitioner contends registered on the statement of Ruby deceased-Jyoti, wherein, she estranged relationship with his wife head, thus resulting in her death. that notwithstanding the merits at this stage, he presses for the incarceration of the petitioner. It is custody on 03.09.2020 and he has than 05 years and 05 months. He take long as only 09 out of 20 examined so far. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.17 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 241 CRM-M-19505-2026 (O&M) 4. Learned State Counsel is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid facts. On a pointed query, State Counsel further does not dispute that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and that he is not wanted in any other case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into consideration, clean antecedents of the petitioner, the period of custody already undergone by him which is nearly 05 years and 05 months coupled with the stage of trial wherein only 09 out of 20 witnesses cited by the prosecution has been examined so far, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 17.04.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.04.17 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document