CRM-M-41592 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT HARSH @ NANIYA STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA 1 The date when the judgment is reserved 2 The date when the judgment is pronounced 3 The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website 4 Whether only pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced 5 The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full judgment and reasons thereof. Present: Mohd. Yousuf, Mr. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. The 483 of Bharatiya grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. registered under Sections 110, 115, 126, 190, 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) added later on 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a writ complaint submitted by the complainant 41592-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM HARSH @ NANIYA Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA The date when the judgment is reserved The date when the judgment is pronounced The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full judgment and reasons thereof. Mohd. Yousuf, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana **** MANISHA BATRA, J. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. registered under Sections 110, 115, 126, 190, 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) n) at Police Station Badhra, District Charkhi Dadri. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a writ complaint submitted by the complainant-Vikas alias Padwa IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-41592-2026 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondent HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA The date when the judgment is reserved 09.09.2026 The date when the judgment is pronounced 10.09.2026 The date when the judgment is uploaded on the 10.09.2026 operative part of the judgment is pronounced or whether the full judgment is Full The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full Not applicable Advocate for the petitioner Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana filed by the petitioner under Section Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.106 dated 08.06.2026 registered under Sections 110, 115, 126, 190, 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) (Section 109(2) of BNS at Police Station Badhra, District Charkhi Dadri. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written Vikas alias Padwa, alleging therein Section for 106 dated 08.06.2026 registered under Sections 110, 115, 126, 190, 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) of S ten alleging therein AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-41592 that on the evening of 07.06.202 more persons, nam village in his car bearing way, a Camper make vehicle came from the opposite side and directly hit the driver's side of his vehicle. The complainant found that the accused Dinesh was driver of the said vehicle and the accused Surender, along with 3-4 more persons, were occupants of the same. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant by striking blows with wooden sticks, iron pipes and axe on the person of the complainant and then, they left the spot. The complainant was admitted to hospital and was provided treatment. 3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, the CCTV footage was procured, wherein the present petitioner along with the co seen while opening attack upon the victim. The victim had sustained as many as 13 injuries. During the course of investigation, offences under Sections 351(3) and 238(3) of BNS were added and offence under Section 351(2) was deleted. The petitioner and some co They suffered disclosure statements admitting their involvement in the crime and identified the spot of occurren Camper vehicle used in the offence as well as a wooden danda. Investigation now stands concluded. 41592-2026 (O&M) 2 that on the evening of 07.06.2026, he along with his friend Rahul and two more persons, namely Tanuj and Sonu alias Don, w village in his car bearing registration number HR way, a Camper make vehicle came from the opposite side and directly hit the driver's side of his vehicle. The complainant found that the accused Dinesh was driver of the said vehicle and the accused Surender, 4 more persons, were occupants of the same. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant by striking blows with wooden sticks, iron pipes and axe on the person of the complainant and then, while proclaiming that they would kill him in future, they left the spot. The complainant was admitted to hospital and was provided After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, the CCTV footage was procured, wherein the present petitioner along with the co seen while opening attack upon the victim. The victim had sustained as many as 13 injuries. During the course of investigation, offences under Sections 1(3) and 238(3) of BNS were added and offence under Section 351(2) was deleted. The petitioner and some co-accused were arrested on 09.06.202 They suffered disclosure statements admitting their involvement in the crime and identified the spot of occurrence. The petitioner got recovered the Camper vehicle used in the offence as well as a wooden danda. Investigation now stands concluded. , he along with his friend Rahul and two ely Tanuj and Sonu alias Don, was going towards their registration number HR-34-M-4717. While on the way, a Camper make vehicle came from the opposite side and directly hit the driver's side of his vehicle. The complainant found that the accused Dinesh was driver of the said vehicle and the accused Surender, Anuj and Maheshi, 4 more persons, were occupants of the same. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant by striking blows with wooden sticks, iron pipes and axe on the person of the while proclaiming that they would kill him in future, they left the spot. The complainant was admitted to hospital and was provided After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, the CCTV footage of the place of occurrence was procured, wherein the present petitioner along with the co-accused was seen while opening attack upon the victim. The victim had sustained as many as 13 injuries. During the course of investigation, offences under Sections 1(3) and 238(3) of BNS were added and offence under Section 351(2) was accused were arrested on 09.06.2026. They suffered disclosure statements admitting their involvement in the crime ce. The petitioner got recovered the Camper vehicle used in the offence as well as a wooden danda. Investigation , he along with his friend Rahul and two going towards their 4717. While on the way, a Camper make vehicle came from the opposite side and directly hit the driver's side of his vehicle. The complainant found that the accused Dinesh , 4 more persons, were occupants of the same. All of them were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon the complainant by striking blows with wooden sticks, iron pipes and axe on the person of the while proclaiming that they would kill him in future, they left the spot. The complainant was admitted to hospital and was provided After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were of the place of occurrence accused was seen while opening attack upon the victim. The victim had sustained as many as 13 injuries. During the course of investigation, offences under Sections 1(3) and 238(3) of BNS were added and offence under Section 351(2) was . They suffered disclosure statements admitting their involvement in the crime ce. The petitioner got recovered the Camper vehicle used in the offence as well as a wooden danda. Investigation AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-41592 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not name since 09.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as no prosecution witness has been examined so far. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. No specific overt act has been attributed to His antecedents are clean. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed upon him. It is benefit of bail. 5. Per contra consideration the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the victim sustained as many as seven grievous injuries in this case, out of which two were declared to be dangerous to life, the petitioner does not deserve t 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. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries to the complainant. The allegations make out a subject offences as against the petitioner. However, investigation now stands concluded. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. Further 41592-2026 (O&M) 3 It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not name since 09.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as no prosecution witness has been examined so far. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. No specific overt act has been attributed to His antecedents are clean. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed upon him. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be extended benefit of bail. Per contra, learned State counsel ion the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the victim sustained as many as seven grievous injuries in this case, out of which two were declared to be dangerous to life, the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries to the complainant. The allegations make out a prima facie subject offences as against the petitioner. However, investigation now stands concluded. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. Further It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not named in the FIR. He is in custody since 09.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as no prosecution witness has been examined so far. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. No specific overt act has been attributed to him. His antecedents are clean. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to argued that he deserves to be extended , learned State counsel has argued that taking into ion the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the victim sustained as many as seven grievous injuries in this case, out of which two were declared to be dangerous to life, o be extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries to the prima facie case for commission of subject offences as against the petitioner. However, investigation now stands concluded. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. Further It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been d in the FIR. He is in custody since 09.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as no prosecution witness has been examined so far. His continued detention would him. His antecedents are clean. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to argued that he deserves to be extended has argued that taking into ion the gravity of the allegations as leveled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the victim sustained as many as seven grievous injuries in this case, out of which two were declared to be dangerous to life, , therefore, This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object thereof, is alleged to have voluntarily caused simple as well as grievous injuries to the se for commission of subject offences as against the petitioner. However, investigation now stands concluded. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. Further AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-41592 incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose. No specific overt act has been attributed to him. It is well law that pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post sentence and that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. jail is to secure appearance of preventive or punitive. this Court is of the considered opinion that the for grant of release on bail in his favour. and the petitioner is ordered to be released personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned 8. It is made cl for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 9. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infru 10.09.2026 Amit Sharma 41592-2026 (O&M) 4 incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose. No rt act has been attributed to him. It is well trial incarceration should not be a replica of post sentence and that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. jail is to secure appearance of the accused during trial, and it cannot be preventive or punitive. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the for grant of release on bail in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose. No rt act has been attributed to him. It is well-settled proposition of trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentence and that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. The object of the the accused during trial, and it cannot be Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case Accordingly, the petition is allowed on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. ear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no Since the main petition has been allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No incarceration of the petitioner is not going to serve any fruitful purpose. No settled proposition of conviction The object of the the accused during trial, and it cannot be Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, petitioner has made out a case Accordingly, the petition is allowed on bail subject to his furnishing the learned trial Court/Chief ear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no pending application, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.09.10 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.