CRM-M-51293-2025 -1- (235) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-51293-2025 Date of Decision: 17.09.2025 ANIKET ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Ajay Ghangas, Advocate with Mr. Ankit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. T.P. Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.0073 dated 23.03.2025 registered under Sections 115, 118(1), 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 at Police Station Saran, District Faridabad. 2. The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Neeraj Sharma S/o Shri Harimohan Sharma and the same reads as under:- “To, The In-charge, Police Post, Parvatiya Colony, Faridabad Respected Sir, It is submitted that I, Neeraj Sharma, son of Shri Harimohan Sharma, resident of House No. 3114/B, Jawahar Colony, Faridabad, am living there and work in a private company. I have two sons. The elder son's name is Gautam, age 20 years, and the younger son's name is Pranshu, age 17 years. On date 22/03/25, my elder son had gone on my motorcycle to Subhash Chowk, Thekewali Gali, nearby, to purchase household JITESH LAL 2025.09.17 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-51293-2025 -2- goods from the market. When my son was turning his motorcycle there, three boys standing there made fun of my son and started laughing. Then my son said to them, why are you making fun of me by taunting. Upon this very matter, those three boys together beat my son and abused him, and called one of their companions on the phone. As soon as he arrived, he forcefully struck an ice- breaking Sua into the back of my son Gautam and left the Sua pierced in my son's back. Because of this, my son started shouting "help, help," upon which seeing the crowd of passersby gathering there, all four boys mounted on one motorcycle and ran away while threatening my son that if they met him again, they would kill him. They left behind one of their motorcycles there, bearing number HR 87Q 1551 Splendor, and escaped. These people beat my child without any fault of his. From there, some person took my son to BK Hospital and also informed me on the phone to reach BK Hospital, upon which I reached BK Hospital to my son. There my son told me all these things. The doctor prepared the MLR of my son and referred him to Trauma Center, Delhi. I then took my son to Trauma Center, Delhi, and am getting him treated there. From my own inquiry I have come to know that the boys who beat my son are Aniket son of Satish, Rohit son of Sanjay, Ranjit, and Ashish. It was Ashish who stabbed my son in the back with the sua. Therefore, I am submitting this complaint to you at Trauma Hospital, Delhi. You are requested to take legal action against these persons. Sd/- Neeraj Sharma.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has been attributed only kick and fist blows on the person of the injured. The MLR reflects two injuries, both being incised wounds. One Ashish has been attributed the injury attracting Section 109 of BNS, 2023 (307 IPC). He has already been granted the concession of bail being a juvenile. As the petitioner JITESH LAL 2025.09.17 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-51293-2025 -3- is in custody since 06.05.2025 but none of the 13 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State contends that the nature of the allegations and the manner in which the occurrence took place does not entitle the petitioner to the grant of bail. He, however concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 06.05.2025 and that none of the 13 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 06.05.2025 but none of the 13 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 7. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner-Aniket S/o Satish Chand is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the JITESH LAL 2025.09.17 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-51293-2025 -4- State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order. 9. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 17.09.2025 JUDGE JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL 2025.09.17 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document