CRM-M-23538- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT ( 229) KARAMJEET @ KALA STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. under Sections 103(1), 127(1), 190, 191(3), Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered complaint submitted by the complainant year back, he alongwith his friends Kulbir and Mohit was going towards his village in a bus when an altercation had taken place between them and the accused Vicky, Aman and Mida. Since then the latter were nursing grudge against the complainant and his friends. -2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH KARAMJEET @ KALA Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. DPS Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.103 dated 01.05.2025 registered under Sections 103(1), 127(1), 190, 191(3), 249 and 238 of Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) at Police Station City, District Kaithal. The aforementioned FIR was registered nt submitted by the complainant-Aman, ack, he alongwith his friends Kulbir and Mohit was going towards his village in a bus when an altercation had taken place between them and the accused Vicky, Aman and Mida. Since then the latter were nursing grudge against the complainant and his friends. On 01.05.2025, he had come from his IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-23538-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 10.07.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Advocate for the petitioner petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 103 dated 01.05.2025 registered 249 and 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya at Police Station City, District Kaithal. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written , alleging therein that about one ack, he alongwith his friends Kulbir and Mohit was going towards his village in a bus when an altercation had taken place between them and the accused Vicky, Aman and Mida. Since then the latter were nursing grudge On 01.05.2025, he had come from his 2026 .. Petitioner ...Respondent petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section for grant 103 dated 01.05.2025 registered Bharatiya Nyaya n the basis of a written alleging therein that about one ack, he alongwith his friends Kulbir and Mohit was going towards his village in a bus when an altercation had taken place between them and the accused Vicky, Aman and Mida. Since then the latter were nursing grudge On 01.05.2025, he had come from his AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23538- village to Kaithal City market on his Platina mot going back, they were intercepted by the accused Aman, Mitha, Vicky, Sahil, Jai Parkash and the present petitioner who were accompanied by 02 m All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant and his companion Kulbir. The complainant managed to flee out of fear but Kulbir was assaulted by the assailants and subsequently he came to know that he was r the hands of the assailants. 3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The post-mortem of the dead body of the victim Kulbir was conducted. The accused Jai Pra statement admitting his involvement in the crime. The co Sahil were arrested subsequently. The petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2025. On interrogation, he suffered disclosure st the crime and got recovered his blood occurrence. He also suffered a subsequent disclosure statement. The remaining accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. All the injuries as found on the person of dea body of the victim are stab and not to him. No sp since long. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. He was not even seen in the -2026 (O&M) 2 Kaithal City market on his Platina mot going back, they were intercepted by the accused Aman, Mitha, Vicky, Sahil, Jai and the present petitioner who were accompanied by 02 m All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant and his companion Kulbir. The complainant managed to flee out of fear but Kulbir was assaulted by the assailants and subsequently he came to know that he was rushed to hospital but succumbed to the injuries sustained at the hands of the assailants. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. mortem of the dead body of the victim Kulbir was conducted. The accused Jai Prakash was arrested on 05.03.2025. He suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime. The co Sahil were arrested subsequently. The petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2025. On interrogation, he suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime and got recovered his blood-stained clothe occurrence. He also suffered a subsequent disclosure statement. The remaining accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. All the injuries as found on the person of dea body of the victim are stab wounds and have been attributed to co and not to him. No specific act has also been attributed to him. He is in custody since long. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. He was not even seen in the Kaithal City market on his Platina motorbike and when they were going back, they were intercepted by the accused Aman, Mitha, Vicky, Sahil, Jai and the present petitioner who were accompanied by 02 more persons. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant and his companion Kulbir. The complainant managed to flee out of fear but Kulbir was assaulted by the assailants and subsequently he came to ushed to hospital but succumbed to the injuries sustained at After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. mortem of the dead body of the victim Kulbir was conducted. The kash was arrested on 05.03.2025. He suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime. The co-accused Jasbir and Sahil were arrested subsequently. The petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2025. atement admitting his involvement in stained clothes worn at the time of occurrence. He also suffered a subsequent disclosure statement. The remaining accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. All the injuries as found on the person of dead wounds and have been attributed to co-accused Sahil ecific act has also been attributed to him. He is in custody since long. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. He was not even seen in the orbike and when they were going back, they were intercepted by the accused Aman, Mitha, Vicky, Sahil, Jai ore persons. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant and his companion Kulbir. The complainant managed to flee out of fear but Kulbir was assaulted by the assailants and subsequently he came to ushed to hospital but succumbed to the injuries sustained at After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. mortem of the dead body of the victim Kulbir was conducted. The kash was arrested on 05.03.2025. He suffered disclosure accused Jasbir and Sahil were arrested subsequently. The petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2025. atement admitting his involvement in at the time of occurrence. He also suffered a subsequent disclosure statement. The remaining It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been d accused Sahil ecific act has also been attributed to him. He is in custody since long. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. He was not even seen in the AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23538- CCTV footage where clean. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner who by forming membership of unlawful assembly with the co-accused, had opened an assault upon the complainant and the victim Kulbir and had caused serious injuries to the victim Kulbir, thereby causing his homicidal death. He was clea installed at the place of occurrence. Blood also been recovered which shows his active complicity in the crime. There is nothing on record to show that there would be of the trial. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 7. The petitioner unlawful assembly with the co thereof is alleged to have assaulted the victim. the acts attributed with the aid of Section 10 149 of IPC). The essential ingredients of this offence are that there must be an unlawful assembly and offence must have been committed by any member of the assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly or either of the member must know that such offe -2026 (O&M) 3 CCTV footage wherein the incident had been captured. His antecedents are clean. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be released on bail. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations inst the petitioner who by forming membership of unlawful assembly with accused, had opened an assault upon the complainant and the victim Kulbir and had caused serious injuries to the victim Kulbir, thereby causing his homicidal death. He was clearly seen in the video clip taken from the camera installed at the place of occurrence. Blood-stained clothing of the petitioner has also been recovered which shows his active complicity in the crime. There is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in the conclusion of the trial. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common object thereof is alleged to have assaulted the victim. The petitioner has been linked to buted with the aid of Section 109 of . The essential ingredients of this offence are that there must be an unlawful assembly and offence must have been committed by any member of the assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly or either of the member must know that such offence is likely to be committed. en captured. His antecedents are clean. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be released on bail. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations inst the petitioner who by forming membership of unlawful assembly with accused, had opened an assault upon the complainant and the victim Kulbir and had caused serious injuries to the victim Kulbir, thereby causing his rly seen in the video clip taken from the camera stained clothing of the petitioner has also been recovered which shows his active complicity in the crime. There is any undue delay in the conclusion of the trial. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel is alleged to have formed membership of an accused and in prosecution of common object The petitioner has been linked to 9 of BNS (pari materia to Section . The essential ingredients of this offence are that there must be an unlawful assembly and offence must have been committed by any member of the assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly or either of nce is likely to be committed. The en captured. His antecedents are Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that there are serious and specific allegations inst the petitioner who by forming membership of unlawful assembly with accused, had opened an assault upon the complainant and the victim Kulbir and had caused serious injuries to the victim Kulbir, thereby causing his rly seen in the video clip taken from the camera stained clothing of the petitioner has also been recovered which shows his active complicity in the crime. There is any undue delay in the conclusion of the trial. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel is alleged to have formed membership of an accused and in prosecution of common object The petitioner has been linked to to Section . The essential ingredients of this offence are that there must be an unlawful assembly and offence must have been committed by any member of the assembly in prosecution of the common object of the assembly or either of The AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23538- allegations prima facie occurrence while having knowledge that such offences were likely to be committed in prosecution of common object. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as heinous crime punishable with capital punishment or life imprisonment length of incarceration is a factor that weighs with the Court in considering bail, it cannot overshado 302 IPC. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking bail mainly on the ground of his prolonged custody. The well settled proposition of law is that mere prolonged period of cus take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds for enlarging an accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the obse Kumar Saxena Vs. UOI, 2008(63) ACC (SC) Yadav Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC, 242 Amaramani Tripathi, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 280(SC) proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstance of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameters set out for considering the application for grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. That apart, reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence or threatening the prosecution should always be considered, and it is only the element of -2026 (O&M) 4 prima facie show his clear involvement/participation in the occurrence while having knowledge that such offences were likely to be committed in prosecution of common object. The allegations against the oner are serious in nature as he along with co heinous crime punishable with capital punishment or life imprisonment length of incarceration is a factor that weighs with the Court in considering bail, it cannot overshadow the seriousness of the accusation of murder under Section The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking bail mainly on the ground of his prolonged custody. The well settled proposition of law is that mere prolonged period of custody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds for enlarging an accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the obse Kumar Saxena Vs. UOI, 2008(63) ACC (SC) Yadav Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC, 242 Amaramani Tripathi, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 280(SC) proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstance of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameters set out for considering the application for grant of il. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. That apart, reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence or threatening the material witnesses is also to be weighed. Frivolity of prosecution should always be considered, and it is only the element of show his clear involvement/participation in the occurrence while having knowledge that such offences were likely to be committed in prosecution of common object. The allegations against the he along with co-accused stands accused of a heinous crime punishable with capital punishment or life imprisonment. While length of incarceration is a factor that weighs with the Court in considering bail, w the seriousness of the accusation of murder under Section The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking bail mainly on the ground of his prolonged custody. The well settled proposition of tody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds for enlarging an accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made in Parmod Kumar Saxena Vs. UOI, 2008(63) ACC (SC), Chenna Boyanna Krishna Yadav Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC, 242 and State through CBI Vs. Amaramani Tripathi, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 280(SC). It is also well-settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstance of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameters set out for considering the application for grant of il. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. That apart, reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence material witnesses is also to be weighed. Frivolity of prosecution should always be considered, and it is only the element of show his clear involvement/participation in the occurrence while having knowledge that such offences were likely to be committed in prosecution of common object. The allegations against the accused stands accused of a While length of incarceration is a factor that weighs with the Court in considering bail, w the seriousness of the accusation of murder under Section The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking bail mainly on the ground of his prolonged custody. The well settled proposition of tody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds for enlarging an accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Parmod Chenna Boyanna Krishna State through CBI Vs. settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstance of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameters set out for considering the application for grant of il. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity of punishment if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. That apart, reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence material witnesses is also to be weighed. Frivolity of prosecution should always be considered, and it is only the element of AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23538- genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. petitioner is not entitled to be released on by him in custody. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the quantum of sentence for which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case but without meaning to make any co merits thereof, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 8. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. 10.07.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 5 genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail only on the ground of period spent by him in custody. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the quantum of sentence for which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case but without meaning to make any co merits thereof, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANI Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. As such, the bail only on the ground of period spent by him in custody. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the quantum of sentence for which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case but without meaning to make any comment on the merits thereof, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No As such, the bail only on the ground of period spent by him in custody. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the quantum of sentence for which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and mment on the merits thereof, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.07.10 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.