CRM-M-71492-202 IN THE H (243) AMAN KUMAR STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON'B Present: Mr. Ms. H MANISHA BATR 1. The p Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S 2023 (for short “ Section 29 of Arm Police Station Ber 2. The a complaint submitt 14.07.2025, he al petitioner had reac taken place betwe complainant on th otherwise he woul and his cousin left 2025(O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH CR Da MAR Versus
HARYANA ON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISH Mr. Hritik Gupta, Advocate for the pe Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 109(1), 351(3) and 61 “BNS”) and Section 25 of Arms A of Arms Act added later on and Sec n Beri, District Jhajjhar. The aforementioned FIR was registe ubmitted by complainant Bijender al he alongwith his cousin Suresh had ad reached alongwith one unknown pe between them. The father of the t on the phone of the petitioner and a e would be killed by the petitioner. On sin left the fields on their motorbike bu JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-71492-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.01.2026
... Petitioner
...Respondent
NISHA BATRA
the petitioner
preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.198 dated 14.07.2025 nd 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, rms Act [Section 238(b) of BNS and nd Section 61 of BNS removed] at registered on the basis of a written der alleging that on the evening of h had gone to his fields where the wn person. A verbal altercation had f the petitioner made a call to the and asked him to leave that place; er. On hearing this, the complainant bike but the petitioner followed them
nder ) 2025 hita, and at ritten g of e the had the lace; inant them AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.28 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71492-202 and fired two sho brother. Thereaf investigation proc 17.07.2025. He crime and got reco of subject offence. 3. It is a falsely implicated is in custody sinc antecedents are cle be dangerous to li attracted. As per of the person victi the petitioner. T urged that the peti 4. Status counsel has argue There are chances benefit of bail. It allowed. 5. This C for both the parties 6. The complainant and h them. The said 2025(O&M) 2 o shots with his pistol that hit the hereafter the petitioner fled away. n proceedings were initiated. The suffered disclosure statement adm ot recovered the countrymade pistol ffence. Investigation now stands concl It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. A false recovery h y since long. He is not required f are clean. The injuries sustained by t s to life and as such the provisions o s per the FSL report, the cartridge re n victim was not fired from the count r. The trial will take considerable tim e petitioner deserves to be extended Status report and custody certificate h argued that there are serious alleg hances of his intimidating the witness ail. It is, therefore, stressed that the p This Court has heard the rival submis parties at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have t and his cousin on 14.07.2025 by fi said pistol had allegedly been reco hit the complainant and his cousin away. After registration of FIR, The petitioner was arrested on ent admitting his involvement in the used by him in the commission s concluded. l for the petitioner that he has been very has been planted upon him. He ired for further investigation. His by the victims were not opined to ions of Section 109 of BNS are not dge recovered from the body of one countrymade pistol recovered from ble time to conclude. It is, therefore, benefit of bail. icate have been filed. Learned State s allegations against the petitioner. itnesses or absconding, if extended t the petition does not deserve to be ubmissions made by learned counsel have made an attempt to kill the by firing shots with a pistol upon n recovered at the instance of the usin FIR, on n the ssion been . He His ed to e not e from fore, State oner. nded to be unsel l the upon f the AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.28 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71492-202 petitioner, howeve the injured Bijend could be fired fro whether the petiti upon the victims. required for furthe since only charge examined so far. commission of th discussed facts, th served by detaini proposition of law conviction sentenc In view of the abo out for grant of b allowed and the furnishing persona the satisfaction of Magistrate/Duty M (i) ind fac ma (ii) circ (iii hea 2025(O&M) 3 owever, as per the FSL report, the bu Bijender Singh has not been fired by red from .32 revolver. As such it petitioner had used the recovered ctims. The petitioner is in custody further investigation. The trial will ob arges have been framed and no p o far. Though the allegations prim of the subject offences, however, cts, this Court is of the opinion that detaining the petitioner in custody of law that pre-trial incarceration s entencing. Even otherwise bail is the he above discussion, this Court is of t t of bail to the petitioner at this stag d the petitioner is ordered to be rel ersonal as well as surety bonds to the ion of the learned trial Court and lea uty Magistrate concerned and on the (i) The petitioner shall not dire inducement, threat or promise to a facts of the case or tamper with th manner whatsoever.
(ii) The petitioner shall not le circumstance without permission of (iii) The petitioner shall appear b hearing.
the bullet taken out from the leg of ed by the said pistol rather the same ch it is a debatable question as to ered pistol for the purpose of firing stody since 17.07.2025. He is not will obviously take time to conclude d no prosecution witness has been s prima facie make out a case for ever, keeping in view the above n that no useful purpose would be stody anymore. It is well settled ation shall not be replica of post- l is the rule and jail is an exception. is of the opinion that a case is made is stage. Accordingly, the petition is be released on bail subject to his to the extent of two sureties and to learned trial Court/Chief Judicial n the following conditions:-
rectly or indirectly make any se to any person acquainted with the with the evidence of the case in any not leave the country under any sion of the learned trial Court.
pear before each and every date of eg of same to iring s not lude been e for bove d be ttled - n. ade on is his to icial any h the any any te of AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.28 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71492-202 (iv) resi info (v) num swi (vi) det his 7.
In the petitioner, it shal application seekin 8. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 9. Since any, is rendered in 27.01.2026 Amit Sharma 2025(O&M) 4 (iv) The petitioner shall provide h residing after release and shall n informing the concerned IO/SHO. (v) The petitioner shall upon his r number to concerned IO/SHO and switched on all times.
(vi) The petitioner shall surrender details of his cell phone and Aadh his mobile number(s) during the pe In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent to seeking cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case.
Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous.
(MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
vide his address where he would be shall not change the same without SHO.
n his release give his mobile phone O and shall keep his mobile phone rrender his passport, if any, furnish Aadhar card, and shall not change the pendency of the trial.
y FIR/complaint lodged against the dent to seek redressal by filing an vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
ld be thout hone hone rnish ange t the g an y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.01.28 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.