Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1802 (PNJ)

RAHUL v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/68316/2025 · 2026-03-11

Aman Chaudhary

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.140 dated 16.05.2024, registered at Police Station Nighdh Karnal, under Sections 2. custody for per the allegations, he had given a sword blow on the knee of the deceased, however, as per the MLR Annexure P part of the weapon injuries with knife on the stomach and shoul co-accused Lovely Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.140 dated 16.05.2024, registered at Police Station Nighdh Karnal, under Sections 148, 149, 302, 307, 323 Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and about 9 months. He alleges false implication. per the allegations, he had given a sword blow on the knee of the deceased, however, as per the MLR Annexure P part of the weapon. Further that, no blood injuries with knife on the stomach and shoul accused Lovely. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.140 dated 16.05.2024, registered at Police Station Nighdhu Karnal, District 307, 323, 452 and 506 IPC. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in He alleges false implication. As per the allegations, he had given a sword blow on the knee of the deceased, however, as per the MLR Annexure P-4, it is by way of blunt was found on the sword. Fatal injuries with knife on the stomach and shoulder have been attributed to PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.11 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for the complainant opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having given sword blow. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner being not involved in any other case. 4. Heard. 5. 6. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.11 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court. (viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner. 7. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order. 8. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.03.11 18:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.