CRM-M-65025-2024 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-65025-2024 Reserved on: 17th March, 2025 Pronounced on: 24 th March, 2025 Sachin Sharma @ Sunny ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. J.S. Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sheenu Sura, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. *** MANISHA BATRA, J :- The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 276 dated 25.12.2022 registered under Sections 302, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC (Sections 394, 397, 201 and 404 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 added later on) at Police Station Bahuakbarpur, District Rohtak. 2. As per the allegations, on 24.12.2022, victim Anil Kumar Arora, who was retired army personnel and was doing work of Network marketing in Forsage company, had left his house at about 10:00 AM by informing his family members that he was going to Rohtak as he had received a call from someone. He did not return till evening. The complainant made repeated calls to his father but he did not respond. At Parveen Sharma 2025.03.26 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-65025-2024 2- about 10:00 PM, the phone of his father was picked up by some police official, who informed that his dead body was found lying on the kacha path near the Rajvaha of village Muradpur Tekhna. His car was also lying at the same spot. FIR was registered against unknown person. Investigation proceedings were initiated. Post-mortem examination of the dead body of the victim was conducted. 3. As per the further allegations, during the course of investigation, statement of Sidharath son of the victim had been recorded, who informed that the victim had disclosed to him that he was doing share market business with the petitioner and since a dispute had arisen between him(victim) and the petitioner on money transaction, he was going to his village to sort that out. He raised suspicion that the victim had been murdered by the petitioner along with his accomplices. The petitioner was arrested on 25.12.2022. He suffered disclosure statement to the effect that he along with co-accused Vikas @ Chaudhary and Nishant @ Nishu had committed murder of the victim. The petitioner also got recovered the registration certificate of the vehicle owned by the victim, his ATM/debit Card, identity proofs, canteen smart card and grocery cards etc.. Two of gold rings, leather wallet and some of the money belonging to the victim had also been recovered. The co-accused Nishant @ Nishu and Vikas were arrested on 26.12.2022. Offences under Section 201 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act were added. Investigation stands completed and the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of offences. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of statement of Sidharath, Parveen Sharma 2025.03.26 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-65025-2024 3- son of the victim, which is quite vague in nature and cannot be accepted.. He was not named in the FIR. A false recovery has been planted upon him. The complainant has not uttered anything against him. He is in custody since long. Trial would take considerable time. Therefore, it is urged that he deserves to be released on bail. 5. Status report has been filed by respondent-State. It is argued by learned Deputy Advocate General that the victim had been brutally murdered. He had sustained as many as 18 injuries, which were all incised wounds. The belongings of the victim had been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. The allegations against him are serious in nature. There is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. Therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have gone through the record carefully. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have hatched a conspiracy with the co-accused and in pursuance thereof, he is alleged to have committed murder of the victim. The complainant Rohit Arora has been examined before the learned trial Court as PW-1. Copy of his sworn deposition as well as other family members of the victim have been produced on record and the same show that none of them has made deposition as against the petitioner. However, since neither of them was an eye-witness to the murder of the victim, therefore, no benefit can be taken of the fact that they have not identified the petitioner as one of the assailants. The allegations against the petitioner are quite serious in nature. The belongings of the victim have been Parveen Sharma 2025.03.26 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-65025-2024 4- recovered at the instance of the petitioner. However, the mere long period of incarceration in jail itself can not be considered to be a ground for entitling the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. It is well settled proposition of law that where offences alleged are serious and grave in nature, long period of incarceration and the fact that the trial is not likely to the concluded in near future may not a ground entitling the accused to be released on bail. Keeping in view the nature of the accusations as levelled against the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without meaning to make any comment on the merits of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Hence, the same is dismissed. 8. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. [MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE 24 th March, 2025 Parveen Sharma 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No Parveen Sharma 2025.03.26 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document