Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2023 DAILYLAW 5273 (PNJ)

SAHIL BADHANA v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/22979/2026 · 2026-04-30

Vinod S Bhardwaj

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE 207 Sahil Badhana State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 190(3), Sanhita, 2023 at first petition for grant 2. FIR Harjinder Singh Shri 5th May acquaintance Singh Hospital hospital been Tulsi and Nishan resident THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22979 Date of decision: VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Suhail Khan, 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FIR No.92 dated 190(3), 190, 115, 118(1), 109(1), 324(4) at Police Station Faridabad NIT., grant of regular bail was withdrawn FIR in the present case was registered and the same reads as under:- “I respectfully state that my name Shri Nihal, resident of house number May 2025 at around 3:18 AM, I acquaintance Navneet Ahuja, who Singh has been injured and they Hospital at Neelam Chowk. After hospital and asked about my son, then been attacked with a knife. My son's Tulsi Singh (resident V 76 Inder Colony and Navjeet Ahuja (house number Nishan Hut 5) told me that Sahil Bhadana resident village Pali had carried PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 22979-2026(O&M) decision: 30.04.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ petitioner. Haryana. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 05.05.2025 registered under 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya NIT., District Faridabad, after the withdrawn in January, 2026. registered on the statement of name is Harjinder Singh son of number 119 Nishan Hut NH-5. On received a call from my son's told me that my son Jagnur have brought him to Fortis After some time, I reached the then I came to know that he had son's friends Suraj Singh son of Colony Sector 21B Faridabad) 112 41H floor number 401 Bhadana alias Banni Bhadana out this act along with his SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.05.01 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 207 CRM-M-22979-2026(O&M) friends. Currently my son is in ICU and has also undergone operation. I request that strict action be taken against the guilty. When my son's condition improves, he will record the full statement. There were 8-10 boys with the guilty. Please register statement on my complaint and take appropriate action.” 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that as per the case of the prosecution, stab injuries had been inflicted on the injured and there was a punctured wound that was caused by Rinku Singh. The knife was recovered from one Luvkush Singh-co-accused. He further contends that omnibus and general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and one Mohit Awasthi is alleged to have caused injuries with the knife after taking it from the other co-accused and to handover the same to other persons after causing the injury. He submits that it is highly improbable that the injuries were caused in the manner as suggested by the prosecution. Besides, no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and the only recovery effected is a car in which the assailants are stated to have absconded in haste after the incident. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 10.05.2025 and has already undergone an actual custody of nearly 01 year. The investigation in the case is complete. He further submits that even the charge has not been framed so far and the 19 witnesses cited by the prosecution are yet to be examined, as such, conclusion of trial shall take long. He further emphasizes that the petitioner is a young boy aged 26 years with no criminal antecedents and his continued incarceration is likely to jeopardize his entire future. He further submits that co-accused Mohit Awasthi has already been granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 17.02.2026 passed in CRM- M-1438-2026 by this Court and the case of the petitioner would be at par with SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.05.01 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 207 CRM-M-22979-2026(O&M) the said co-accused Mohit Awasthi, hence, the benefit ought to be extended to him. 4. Mr. Arshdeep S. Khaira, Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the complainant by filing memo of appearance. 5. Learned State Counsel as well as counsel for the complainant reiterate the submissions and allegations levelled in the FIR as well as the statement of injured. They, however, do not dispute that there is no specific injury that is identified to have been caused by the petitioner herein and only recovery of car has been effected from the petitioner while only one knife has been recovered from co-accused Luvkush Singh. A punctured wound was caused with the keys of the motorcycle, which were recovered from Rinku Singh. The stage of the trial as well as the fact that the case of the petitioner would be at par with the co-accused Mohit Awasthi is also not disputed. 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. Taking into consideration the undisputed facts noticed above and also noticing that the case of the petitioner would be at par with co-accused Mohit Awasthi as well as the stage of trial, 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. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.05.01 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 207 CRM-M-22979-2026(O&M) 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. 30.04.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.05.01 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document