Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2023 DAILYLAW 4221 (PNJ)

SURENDER KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/13035/2026 · 2026-03-16

Mandeep Pannu

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-13035- 225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Surender Kumar State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Dr. Pankaj Nanhera, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sachin Jangra, Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate Mr. Jasmine Gill, AAG Haryana. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. The present first bail application by way of petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 88 dated 12.02.2025, Sections 190, 191(3) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 149, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of trial, three materi -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Surender Kumar VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Dr. Pankaj Nanhera, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sachin Jangra, Advocate Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasmine Gill, AAG Haryana. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) The present first bail application by way of petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 88 dated 12.02.2025, Sections 190, 191(3) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 149, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of trial, three material witnesses including the complainant -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13035-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 16.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU Dr. Pankaj Nanhera, Sr. Advocate with for the petitioner. The present first bail application by way of petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 88 dated 12.02.2025, registered under Sections 190, 191(3) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 149, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana. submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month. Learned counsel further submits al witnesses including the complainant The present first bail application by way of petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has been filed for grant registered under Sections 190, 191(3) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 149, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month. Learned counsel further submits al witnesses including the complainant TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.16 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13035- have already been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. 3. It is further contended that the co have already been granted the con co-accused Pradeep Kumar has been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, whereas co released on bail, and Hardeep Singh has been gr that the case of the present petitioner is similarly placed to that of the said co accused, and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for ba the fact that three material witnesses have already been examined and have not supported the case of the prosecution and that the co been released on bail. 5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month, that three material witnesses have already been examined and have turned hostile, and that the co Singh have already been granted the concession of bail, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner Surender Kumar is ordered bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. It is clarified that if the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal activity while on bail, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of -2026 (O&M) have already been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. It is further contended that the co-accused persons in the present case have already been granted the concession of bail. In this regard, it is submitted that accused Pradeep Kumar has been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, whereas co-accused Sukhdev and Hardeep Singh have already been released on bail, and Hardeep Singh has been gr that the case of the present petitioner is similarly placed to that of the said co accused, and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for ba the fact that three material witnesses have already been examined and have not supported the case of the prosecution and that the co been released on bail. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month, that three material witnesses have already been examined and have turned hostile, and that the co-accused persons namely Sukhdev, Pradeep Kumar Singh have already been granted the concession of bail, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner Surender Kumar is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. It is clarified that if the petitioner is found indulging in any other ty while on bail, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of -2- have already been examined and they have not supported the case of the accused persons in the present case cession of bail. In this regard, it is submitted that accused Pradeep Kumar has been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of accused Sukhdev and Hardeep Singh have already been released on bail, and Hardeep Singh has been granted anticipatory bail. It is argued that the case of the present petitioner is similarly placed to that of the said co accused, and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that three material witnesses have already been examined and have not supported the case of the prosecution and that the co-accused persons have already Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month, that three material witnesses have already been examined and have turned hostile, accused persons namely Sukhdev, Pradeep Kumar and Hardeep Singh have already been granted the concession of bail, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner Surender to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty It is clarified that if the petitioner is found indulging in any other ty while on bail, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of have already been examined and they have not supported the case of the accused persons in the present case cession of bail. In this regard, it is submitted that accused Pradeep Kumar has been granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of accused Sukhdev and Hardeep Singh have already been anted anticipatory bail. It is argued that the case of the present petitioner is similarly placed to that of the said co- accused, and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of regular bail. il but does not dispute the fact that three material witnesses have already been examined and have not accused persons have already of the case, particularly the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and one month, that three material witnesses have already been examined and have turned hostile, and Hardeep Singh have already been granted the concession of bail, this Court is of the opinion Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner Surender to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty It is clarified that if the petitioner is found indulging in any other ty while on bail, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.16 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13035- his bail. Nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 8. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed March 16, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) Nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -3- Nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.16 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document