CRM-M- IN 215 Deepak alia v. State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. 27.10.2024 Sections 10 117(2), 238 Station Sad of BNSS fo was dismis 2. noticed her -45583-2025 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA ak alias Deepu of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocat Mr. Vishal Singh, Assistant Ad Mr. Ajay Kamboj, Advocate w Ms. Kiranpreet Kaur, Advocat **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, who is an accuse .2024, registered against him for 109(1), 115, 126, 190, 191(2), 1 2), 238 of BNS added later on) and S Sadar Dabwali, has filed the presen NSS for grant of bail. The first petit dismissed as withdrawn by this Court v Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-45583-2025 Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. dvocate for the petitioner. tant Advocate General, Haryana. cate with dvocate for complainant. accused in case FIR No. 519 date for commission of offences und 1(2), 191(3), 351(2) of BNS (Section and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Polic present 2nd petition under Section 48 t petition bearing CRM-M-13565-202 ourt vide order dated 20.5.2025. ging from the documents on record b .2026 dated s under Sections t Police tion 483 2025 cord be GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- criminal la Shri Satpa evening aft back to the 25.10.2024 later, he a ahead of h coloured Z car deliber reached n recognized His father along with Arshdeep, persons al Deepu and iron rod. The shots Deepak @ an attack intervene, h the assailan kill them o medico leg Satpal had -45583-2025 -2 Anmol, son of Satpal, resid al law in motion by filing a complain atpal runs an electronic shop at g after winding up work and closin their village Rajpura Majra on mo 2024, after closing the shop, his fa he also headed back home. When of him and had reached near Sakt ed ZEN car coming from the opposit liberately attempted to hit his fat d near his father, he confronte ized him as Nishan, son of Amarje her raised his voice and questioned with Deepak @ Deepu (present ep, son of Rajpal, Sukhpreet, son s alighted from the car. Nishan w and Sukhpreet were armed with a ‘K d. Without any provocation, Nisha ots somehow did not hit anybody. k @ Deepu (present petitioner), Ar ack and mercilessly assaulted his ne, he was also beaten up. As peop ailants fled away but not before issu m on any suitable opportunity. On legal report, which indicated that had suffered six injuries, a forma 2- resident of Rajpura Majra, set t plaint pointing therein that his fathe at Abubshahar Bus Stand. Eve losing the shop, the two of them rid motorcycles. At around 7.00 PM o is father left for village. Little whi hen his father was about 100 mete Sakta Khera Minor, he saw a silv posite direction. The driver of the sa father’s motorcycle. When he onted the driver and immediate rjeet, resident of Abubshahar villag ned the boys, when suddenly Nisha ent petitioner), son of Dharampa son of Beant Singh and 2-3 oth an was holding a pistol. Deepak @ a ‘Kappa’ each and Arshdeep had a ishan fired gunshots from his pisto ody. On the instructions of Nisha , Arshdeep and Sukhpreet unleashe his father. When he (c) tried people started gathering near the sit issuing threat to him and his father On the basis of said complaint an that father of the complainant, Sh ormal case vide FIR No. 519 date et the father, Every m ride M on hile meters silver e said he (c) iately illage. ishan mpal, other ak @ ad an pistol. ishan, ashed ied to e site, ther to nt and t, Shri dated GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 27.10.2024 115, 126, 1 added late Dabwali. I was specif involvemen used by him challan wa sought with of six injur namely, Ar custody in seeking the to their gui that pistol a @ Navi, so The said pi the learned dismissed v petition has 3. young boy, delay of 2 d the genuine injury has b -45583-2025 -3 2024, was registered against him fo 26, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2) of B later on) and Section 25 of Arm . Investigations were set in motion ecifically named in the FIR, was ment in the incident, was arrested a y him in the commission of offence. n was filed against present petition with regard to the nature of injuries injuries were opined as ‘Grievou , Arshdeep @ Sandy, Nishan and Su y in some other case, were also j g their production warrants. During r guilt and involvement in the comm stol and cartridge had been procured i, son of Jagsir Singh. Accordingly id pistol and cartridge were taken in Petitioner-accused moved an a learned Additional Sessions Judge, issed vide order dated 20.2.2025. Agg ion has been filed. Learned counsel for the petit g boy, has been falsely implicated in of 2 days in lodging the FIR, further enuineness of the story put forth by th y has been attributed to the present pet 3- m for offences under Sections 109(1 of BNS (Sections 117(2), 238 of BN Arms Act, at Police Station Sada otion. On 28.10.2024, petitioner, wh was questioned. He admitted to h ed and got recovered an iron ‘Kapp nce. On completion of investigatio titioner. Opinion of the doctor wa uries suffered by Shri Satpal, three vous’ in nature. The other accuse nd Sukhpreet @ Bhawra, who were lso joined in the investigation, aft ring interrogation, they also admitte mmission of offence. It also came o cured by them from one Resham Sing ingly, Section 238 of BNS was adde n in possession. d an application for grant of bail befo udge, Sirsa. The same came to b 5. Aggrieved of the said order, prese e petitioner contends that petitioner, ated in the present case. Unexplaine urther raises a serious question mark o h by the prosecution. No specific rol ent petitioner. None of injuries suffere 09(1), f BNS Sadar r, who to his appa’ ation, r was ee out cused, ere in after mitted e out Singh added. il before e to be present ioner, a plained mark on fic role/ suffered GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- by injured petitioner h be taken in examined t future is qu advanced h petitioner i 21 of the be against exception” 4. State couns the manner attack on position to (P) favour who has criminal ca overawing till date can 5. documents 6. have alread been highli petitioner -45583-2025 -4 njured have been declared ‘Danger ioner has been in custody since 28.10 ken in his favour, for out of 14 prose ined till date, hence, the likelihood o e is quite remote. When appreciated nced hereinabove, as per the learned ioner in custody would not only be vio Constitution of India, including ainst the principle of “Bail is a gen ion”. Prayer for grant of bail has bee Per contra, while opposing the counsel accompanied by learned cou anner in which petitioner and his complainant, who suffered three to move around, no case for takin avour, for if extended the concession questionable past antecedents cases of like nature, is quite hi awing complainant and related witness can not be ruled out. Dismissal of Heard learned counsel for ments on record. Factual aspects of the case lea already been noticed hereinabove. highlighted in the status report. Be ioner has been in custody since 28. 4- angerous to life’. The fact that th 28.10.2024, a lenient view deserves 4 prosecution witnesses, none has bee hood of completion of trial in the ne eciated in the light of the submission arned counsel, further incarceration o violative of his rights under Artic right to speedy trial but would als general rule and incarceration is been made. the request for grant of bail, learne counsel for complainant, submit th his other accomplices unleashed three ‘Grievous’ injuries, is not in taking lenient view is made out in of bail, the likelihood of petitione dents being involved in some oth high. Even the possibility of hi itnesses, who have not been examine of the petition has been prayed for. for the parties and perused leading to the registration of the FI The role of the petitioner has als that as it may, considering that .10.2024, though challan has bee that the erves to been the near issions ation of Article also an learned that an in a his titioner, other him amined for. the FIR also the been GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- filed and none has is quite rem rights unde trial but wo incarcerati Dataram (Criminal) 7. West Beng a case unde Supreme C undergone Maharasht granting ba under:- -45583-2025 -5 charges have been framed, but been examined, the possibility of remote, his further incarceration under Article 21 of the Constitution would also be against the princip eration is an exception” as held vs. State of Uttar Pradesh inal) 131. In case of Rup Bahadur Mag engal, Criminal Appeal No.4144 o e under Sections 394, 395, 397, 307 eme Court granted bail to the accuse gone by him of 2 years and 9 months. In the case of Javed Gula rashtra and Anr., (2024) 9 SCC ting bail to accused for 04 years in p “16. Criminals are not born b everyone is good and so, neve redemption. This humanist fu dealing with delinquents, juve has a past and every sinn committed, a variety of facto offender commit the crime. T economic, may be, the resu neglect; may be, because of th manifestation of temptations i with indigence or other privati 5- but out of 14 prosecution witnesse of completion of trial in near futu would not only be violative of ution of India, including right to speed rinciple of “Bail is a general rule an held by Hon’ble Supreme Court esh and another, 2018(2) R.C.R agar @ Sanki @ Rabin Vs. State o 44 of 2024 decided on 04.10.2024, , 307 read with 120-B of IPC, Hon’b accused considering long incarceratio onths. Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State o CC 813, the Supreme Court whi rs in paragraph Nos.16 and 17 held a orn but made. The human potential never write off any criminal as beyon st fundamental is often missed whe juvenile and adult. Indeed, every sai sinner a future. When a crime factors is responsible for making th e. Those factors may be social an result of value erosion or parent of the stress of circumstances, or th ns in a milieu of affluence contraste ivations. itnesses, future his edy and in R.C.R. tate of 2024, in Hon’ble ceration ate of rt while held as tial in eyond when y saint me is ng the l and rental or the rasted GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Singh Alia held that a nonetheless concession -45583-2025 -6 17. If the State or any p court concerned has no wher fundamental right of an acc enshrined under Article 21 of any other prosecuting agency bail on the ground that the cr 21 of the Constitution applies crime.” Recently, a Co-ordinate Ben Alias Billa Vs. State of Punjab pa that although an accused may hav theless if the incarceration period ession of bail. “Therefore, to elucidate furth basic and fundamental princip is a part of reasonable, fair an Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be denied to the accus court in “Hussainara Kha Secretary, State of Bihar, Pa this, reference can be drawn u the under-trials should be as the nature of accusation and t of conviction and the nature o apprehension of tampering wi threat to the complainant. As f and involvement of the petitio reliance can be placed upon th CRM-M-25914-2022 titled as State of Punjab” decided referring Article 21 of the Co held that no doubt, at the tim 6- y prosecuting agency including th herewithal to provide or protect th accused to have a speedy trial a 1 of the Constitution then the State o ency should not oppose the plea fo e crime committed is serious. Artic plies irrespective of the nature of th e Bench of this Court in Neelkam passed in CRM-M-39765-2024 ha y have past criminal antecedents b eriod is long, he is entitled for th further, this Court is conscious of th inciple of law that right to speedy tri ir and just procedure enshrined und tion of India. This constitutional rig ccused as is the mandate of the Ape Khatoon and ors (IV) v. Hom r, Patna”, (1980) 1 SCC 98. Besid wn upon that pre-conviction period as short as possible keeping in vie nd the severity of punishment in ca re of supporting evidence, reasonab g with the witness or apprehension . As far as the pendency of other cas etitioner in other cases is concerne on the order of this Court rendered d as “Baljinder Singh alias Rock v ed on 02.03.2023, wherein, whi Constitution of India, this Court ha e time of granting bail, the crimin g the ct the ial as tate or ea for rticle of the kamal 024 has nts but for the of the y trial under l right Apex Home esides iod of n view n case nable ion of cases erned, red in ck vs. while rt has iminal GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. petitioner released on sound suret concerned. -45583-2025 -7 antecedents of the petitioner same time it is equally true t during the course of trial has t the evidence in that case alo evidence in the other pending adherence to the rule of denia of other cases/convictions in petitioner in a situation of den In view of submissions adva ioner and without adverting to the sed on bail subject to his furnishing d surety bonds to the satisfaction of le erned. The petitioner shall abide by the (i) The petitioner will not the trial. (ii) The petitioner will prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall no permission of the trial Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not offence of which, he is an acc he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall n induce, threaten or promise to facts of the case so as to dissu facts to the Court or to any evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not (vii) The petitioner shall f number to the Trial Court fo same till the conclusion of the the petitioner seeks to chang 7- ner are to be looked into but at th rue that the appreciation of evidenc has to be looked into with reference e alone and not with respect to th ding cases. In such eventuality, stri denial of bail on account of pendenc s in all probability would land th f denial of concession of bail.” advanced by learned counsel for the merits of the case, petitioner ishing bail bonds along with two loc n of learned trial Court/Duty Magistra by the following conditions:- not tamper with the evidence durin ill not pressurize/ intimidate th l not leave the country without prio urt. l not commit an offence similar to th accused, or for commission of whic ll not directly or indirectly coerc ise to any person acquainted with th dissuade him/her from disclosing suc any police officer or tamper with th ot in any manner misuse his liberty ll furnish his address and mobi rt forthwith and shall not change th f the trial and in case for any reaso ange any of the aforesaid, the sam at the idence nce to to the , strict dency d the the ioner is local gistrate during e the prior to the which oerce, ith the g such ith the berty. obile ge the eason, same GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. that in case at liberty t order. 10. herein are l construed a independen 20.01.2026 gbs -45583-2025 -8 shall be done only with prio Court, stating the reason for th (viii) The petitioner will appe and every date fixed, unless i Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty M condition, as deemed app petitioner. Accordingly, the present petiti in case there is any breach of the afore erty to seek cancellation of bail as In view of the above, it is cla n are limited for the purpose of prese trued as an opinion on the merits of the endently of the aforesaid observations .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 8- prior intimation to the learned Tri for the same. appear before the trial Court on eac ess is exempted by a specific order ty Magistrate may impose any oth appropriate while releasing th t petition is allowed and it is made cle e aforesaid conditions, the State shall b ail as granted to the petitioner by th t is clarified that the observations mad f present proceedings and would not s of the case and the trial would procee ations. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No Trial n each der of other g the de clear shall be by this ns made d not be proceed NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.01.22 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document