CRM-M-15687- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (215) ANKIT ALIAS GOLU STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular registered under Section 103(1) of the “BNS”) and Section 25 of Arms Act on) at Police Station Bond Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri. 2. As per the allegations on 19.08.2024, on receipt of an information regarding dead body of one person lying in the fie party had reached there and found the dead body of victim Budh Ram lying there. His cousin brother Mahender -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ANKIT ALIAS GOLU Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. registered under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (Section 238 of the BNS added later on) at Police Station Bond Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri. As per the allegations on 19.08.2024, on receipt of an information regarding dead body of one person lying in the fie party had reached there and found the dead body of victim Budh Ram lying there. His cousin brother Mahender Kumar submitted a written complaint that IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15687-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.04.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Advocate for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) in case arising out of FIR No.0130 dated 19.08.2024 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short , 1959 (Section 238 of the BNS added later on) at Police Station Bond Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri. As per the allegations on 19.08.2024, on receipt of an information regarding dead body of one person lying in the fields of Village Achina, a police party had reached there and found the dead body of victim Budh Ram lying submitted a written complaint that 2026 .. Petitioner ...Respondent under of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) 0130 dated 19.08.2024 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short , 1959 (Section 238 of the BNS added later As per the allegations on 19.08.2024, on receipt of an information police party had reached there and found the dead body of victim Budh Ram lying submitted a written complaint that AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.28 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-15687- the victim was a bachelor, who had been previously convicted in a murder c After undergoing his sentence, he had come back to the village and from the last six months, he was staying in a room built in their fields and had been murdered therein. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, it was found that the petitioner the same village dump location of the cellphones of the petitioner and the victim w and both of them were occurrence. The petitioner who was arrested in another case bearing FIR No.157 dated 23.09.2024 at Police Station Bond Kalan was interrogated and suffered a disclosure statement admitting his involvement in thi basis of which he was nominated as accused in this was secured and he was formally arrested on 27.09.2024. He again suffered disclosure statement admitting the factum of murdering the victim revenge of murder of his grandmother and also disclosed that he had thrown his mobile phone. The pistol used by him in the crime was recovered in case bearing FIR No.157. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner tha falsely implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement recorded by the complainant. There was no eye case rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct incriminating evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of subject offences. The complainant-Mahender Kumar has been examined and has not implicated the petitioner in commission of offence of murder of the victim. There is no other -2026 (O&M) 2 the victim was a bachelor, who had been previously convicted in a murder c After undergoing his sentence, he had come back to the village and from the last was staying in a room built in their fields and had been murdered therein. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. nvestigation, it was found that the petitioner the same village, was missing from the date of incident. The mobile tower of the cellphones of the petitioner and the victim w both of them were found to be present at the . The petitioner who was arrested in another case bearing FIR No.157 dated 23.09.2024 at Police Station Bond Kalan was interrogated and suffered a disclosure statement admitting his involvement in thi basis of which he was nominated as accused in this was secured and he was formally arrested on 27.09.2024. He again suffered disclosure statement admitting the factum of murdering the victim murder of his grandmother and also disclosed that he had thrown his mobile phone. The pistol used by him in the crime was recovered in case bearing FIR No.157. Investigation now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner tha falsely implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement recorded by the complainant. There was no eye-witness to the murder of the victim. The case rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct incriminating ence to connect the petitioner with the commission of subject offences. The Mahender Kumar has been examined and has not implicated the petitioner in commission of offence of murder of the victim. There is no other the victim was a bachelor, who had been previously convicted in a murder case. After undergoing his sentence, he had come back to the village and from the last was staying in a room built in their fields and had been murdered therein. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. nvestigation, it was found that the petitioner, who was also resident of was missing from the date of incident. The mobile tower of the cellphones of the petitioner and the victim were procured o be present at the same spot at the time of . The petitioner who was arrested in another case bearing FIR No.157 dated 23.09.2024 at Police Station Bond Kalan was interrogated and suffered a disclosure statement admitting his involvement in this case on the basis of which he was nominated as accused in this case as well. His presence was secured and he was formally arrested on 27.09.2024. He again suffered disclosure statement admitting the factum of murdering the victim for taking murder of his grandmother and also disclosed that he had thrown his mobile phone. The pistol used by him in the crime was recovered in case bearing FIR No.157. Investigation now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement recorded witness to the murder of the victim. The case rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct incriminating ence to connect the petitioner with the commission of subject offences. The Mahender Kumar has been examined and has not implicated the petitioner in commission of offence of murder of the victim. There is no other ase. After undergoing his sentence, he had come back to the village and from the last was staying in a room built in their fields and had been murdered therein. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. who was also resident of was missing from the date of incident. The mobile tower procured spot at the time of . The petitioner who was arrested in another case bearing FIR No.157 dated 23.09.2024 at Police Station Bond Kalan was interrogated and s case on the as well. His presence was secured and he was formally arrested on 27.09.2024. He again suffered for taking murder of his grandmother and also disclosed that he had thrown his mobile phone. The pistol used by him in the crime was recovered in case t he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement recorded witness to the murder of the victim. The case rests upon circumstantial evidence and there is no direct incriminating ence to connect the petitioner with the commission of subject offences. The Mahender Kumar has been examined and has not implicated the petitioner in commission of offence of murder of the victim. There is no other AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.28 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-15687- material to prove his invol pistol which was allegedly recovered at his instance in another case, and was alleged to be used in the crime recovered from the dead body of the victim as w will take considerable time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. He is in custody for a period of more than 01 year and 06 months. With these broad submissions, it is urged deserves to be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. He has absconded after the murder of the victim. The location of mobile phones of the petitioner as well at the relevant time was been revealed that both time of incident which occurrence at the relevant time. 28 prosecution witnesses already stand to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. With these broad submissio allowed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by the parties at considerable length. 6. The petitioner is alleged to have committed the murder of the victim who had committed murder o -2026 (O&M) 3 material to prove his involvement in the crime. Even as per the FSL Report, the pistol which was allegedly recovered at his instance in another case, and was used in the crime, has not matched with the bullets which were recovered from the dead body of the victim as w will take considerable time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. He is in custody for a period of more than 01 year and 06 months. With these broad submissions, it is urged deserves to be released on bail. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. He has absconded after the murder of the victim. The location of mobile phones of the petitioner as well at the relevant time was procured during the course of investigation and it has been revealed that both the phones were within the same tower location at the time of incident which prima facie establishes rence at the relevant time. The trial is going at a proper pace as 10 out of ecution witnesses already stand examined and there is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by the parties at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have committed the murder of the victim who had committed murder of the grandmother of the petitioner and had vement in the crime. Even as per the FSL Report, the pistol which was allegedly recovered at his instance in another case, and was has not matched with the bullets which were recovered from the dead body of the victim as well as from the spot. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. He is in custody for a period of more than 01 year and 06 months. With these broad submissions, it is urged that he Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. He has absconded after the murder of the victim. The location of mobile phones of the petitioner as well as of the victim during the course of investigation and it has phones were within the same tower location at the establishes his presence at the place of The trial is going at a proper pace as 10 out of examined and there is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. With ns, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by the parties at The petitioner is alleged to have committed the murder of the f the grandmother of the petitioner and had vement in the crime. Even as per the FSL Report, the pistol which was allegedly recovered at his instance in another case, and was has not matched with the bullets which were ell as from the spot. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. He is in custody for a period of more than that he Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. He has absconded after the murder of the as of the victim during the course of investigation and it has phones were within the same tower location at the his presence at the place of The trial is going at a proper pace as 10 out of examined and there is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. With ns, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by the parties at The petitioner is alleged to have committed the murder of the f the grandmother of the petitioner and had AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.28 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-15687- been held guilty and convicted also. There was no eye occurrence. The complainant has also not deposed anything as against the petitioner in his sworn deposition. The FSL report also does not es allegation that the pistol which was allegedly recovered from the petitioner was used in the commission of the subject offence. However, circumstance in the form of tower location of mobile phones of the petitioner as well as of the Investigating Agency which petitioner in the crime. The trial is also going at a proper pace. Taking into consideration the nature of the accusations as quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. A petition is dismissed. 7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. 8. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. 27.04.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 been held guilty and convicted also. There was no eye occurrence. The complainant has also not deposed anything as against the petitioner in his sworn deposition. The FSL report also does not es allegation that the pistol which was allegedly recovered from the petitioner was used in the commission of the subject offence. However, circumstance in the form of tower location of mobile phones of the petitioner as deceased which was the same, has been collected by the Investigating Agency which prima facie establishes the complicity of the petitioner in the crime. The trial is also going at a proper pace. Taking into consideration the nature of the accusations as levelled against the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. A petition is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been dismissed any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No been held guilty and convicted also. There was no eye-witness to the occurrence. The complainant has also not deposed anything as against the petitioner in his sworn deposition. The FSL report also does not establish the allegation that the pistol which was allegedly recovered from the petitioner was used in the commission of the subject offence. However, a material circumstance in the form of tower location of mobile phones of the petitioner as deceased which was the same, has been collected by the establishes the complicity of the petitioner in the crime. The trial is also going at a proper pace. Taking into levelled against the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. Accordingly, the It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No witness to the occurrence. The complainant has also not deposed anything as against the tablish the allegation that the pistol which was allegedly recovered from the petitioner was material circumstance in the form of tower location of mobile phones of the petitioner as deceased which was the same, has been collected by the establishes the complicity of the petitioner in the crime. The trial is also going at a proper pace. Taking into levelled against the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ccordingly, the It is, however, clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case , pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.28 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.