CRM-M- IN 240 Rajender S v. State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. registered a 302 of Indi filed the pre 2. noticed her complaint that his yo profession. mobile pho when the c was ‘switch from his br -45135-2025 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA nder Singh alias Jhendu of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Kartar Singh, Advocate fo Mr. Vikram Singh, AAG, Hary **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in case tered against him for commission of f Indian Penal Code, at Police Station the present petition under Section 483 Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- Proceedings in the present ca int lodged by Pawan Kumar, son o is younger brother Sandeep, aged sion. On 03.08.2022, the complainan phone at about 4.00 AM from the he complainant tried to call his brot witched off’. After about 10-15 min is brother Sandeep, who asked the 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-45135-2025 Date of Decision: 6.11.2025 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. cate for the petitioner. , Haryana. n case FIR No. 166 dated 03.08.202 of offences under Sections 147, 14 tation Odhan (Sirsa), District Sirsa, ha 483 of BNSS for grant of bail. ging from the documents on record b nt case were initiated on the basis on of Dharam Singh, alleging there aged about 25 years, is mason b inant received two missed calls on h the phone of his brother. Thereafte brother Sandeep, his brother’s phon minutes, complainant received a ca the complainant to let him talk to h 2025 8.2022, 47, 149, irsa, has cord be asis of herein on by on his eafter, phone a call to his GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- mother wh handed ove on the pho Khuiyan N said villag thereafter, person, wh situated at The said pe kill his bro well as his Nepalpur, Mani Ram Mani Ram’ that Mani inflicting in Kaur upon as such, w name of p Vikram alia concession 31.7.2025 40469-202 Additional -45135-2025 -2 which the complainant arranged. over the phone to him (c), when h phone saying that his brother Sand n Nepalpur and the said unknown p illage along with 4-5 persons for ta fter, another phone call was rece , who told him and his brother Sa d at Village Khuiyan Nepalpur and id person again asked him (c) to com brother. Complainant accompanie s his uncles Ram Kishan and Ram , where they came to know that S am during night and had been caug am’s mother, namely, Parveen Kau ani Ram along with other co-acc ng injuries with sticks, belt, fist and k It is further the case of pros pon having been caught red hande h, was a party to the offence. It is of petitioner cropped up in the dis alias Vicky and Sandeep, both of w sion of bail by the Coordinate Benc 025 and 11.12.2024 passed in CR 2024, respectively. Petitioner moved an applicatio tional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, who in 2- ged. However, complainant’s moth en he heard voice of unknown perso andeep is in their custody at Villag wn persons asked him to come to or taking back his brother. Shortl received by him from the unknow r Sandeep had come to their hou and had committed a wrongful ac o come there failing which they wou anied by his father Dharam Singh a am Kumar went to Village Khuiya at Sandeep had come to the house caught red handed in the company Kaur in a compromising position an accused had murdered Sandeep b and kick blows. prosecution that co-accused Parvee anded had sided with co-accused an It is further an admitted fact that th e disclosure statement of co-accuse of whom have since been granted th Bench of this Court vide orders date CRM-M-64576-2024 and CRM- lication for grant of bail before learne ho in terms of order dated 05.08.202 other erson illage to the hortly, known house ul act. would gh as uiyan use of any of n and ep by rveen d and at the cused ed the dated -M- learned .2025, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- dismissed t been filed f 3. been falsel disclosure concession M-18407- of argumen face value petitioner t Kumar). It petitioner, recovered i charge was completed incarceratio be violativ including “Bail is Hon’ble another, has been m 4. submission petitioner attack on -45135-2025 -3 issed the said application. Aggrieve filed for grant of bail. Learned counsel for the petit falsely arrayed as an accused in the osure statement of other co-accused, ession of bail by this Court vide order -2025. Learned counsel further su guments, the story put forth by the pro value (though not admitted), there wa ioner to murder the deceased (younge ar). It is also the submission of learne ioner, who was arrested on 26.8.20 ered in pursuance of his disclosure sta e was framed on 22.11.2022, but th leted in the near future is quite ceration would not serve any useful pu iolative of his rights under Article right to speedy trial but would a general rule and incarceratio Supreme Court in Dataram 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131. made. Per contra, learned State issions raised by learned counsel ioner was a member of unlawful on the deceased, who as a conseq 3- grieved of which, present petition ha e petitioner submits that petitioner ha in the present case only on the basis o ed, who has since been granted th order dated 6.11.2025 passed in CRM rther submits that assuming for the sak the prosecution is taken to be true at i ere was no occasion/motive for prese younger brother of complainant Pawa learned counsel that investigations qu .8.2024, are complete, (nothing wa ure statement) as challan has been file but the blikelihood of the trial bein quite remote. Thus, his (P) furth eful purpose as the same would not on rticle 21 of the Constitution of Indi would also be against the principle ration is an exception” as held vs. State of Uttar Pradesh an 131. Prayer for allowing the petitio State counsel while opposing unsel for the petitioner, submits th assembly which unleashed brut consequence thereof died. In view tion has ner has basis of nted the n CRM- the sake at its present t Pawan ions qua ing was en filed, al being further only India, ciple of by and petition the that brutal view of GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- gravity and of bail to 5. documents 6. have alread accused Vi the FIR an granted the orders date CRM-M-40 7. petitioner, that petiti are comple fact that ou thus, possib lenient view criminal c incarceratio Constitutio against the exception 8. to his furn -45135-2025 -4 and seriousness of offence, it has petitioner is made out. Heard learned counsel for ments on record. Factual aspects of the case lea already been noticed in para 2 of the Vikram alias Vicky and Sandeep and specific roles had been ass the concession of bail by the Co dated 31.7.2025 and 11.12.2024 pa 40469-2024, respectively. In view of the submissions adv ioner, but without commenting further petitioner has been in custody since 2 omplete, for challan has already been that out of 22 prosecution witnesses, n possibility of completion of trial in nt view is taken in favour of petitioner inal case, by extending him conce ceration would not only be violative of titution of India, including right to st the principle of “Bail is a gener ion” as held by Hon’ble Supreme Co Resultantly, petitioner is grant is furnishing bail/surety bonds to t 4- has been prayed that no case for gra for the parties and perused leading to the registration of the FI the order. It is not disputed that ndeep who were specifically named assigned to them, have since bee Coordinate Bench this Court vid 24 passed in CRM-M-64576-2024 an advanced by learned counsel for urther on the merits of the case, the fa 26.08.2024, investigations qua hi y been filed, as also taking note of th sses, none has been examined till dat rial in the near future is quite remot titioner who is not involved in any oth concession of bail, for his furth tive of his rights under Article 21 of th ht to speedy trial but would also b eneral rule and incarceration is a me Court in Dataram’s case (supra). s granted the concession of bail subje s to the satisfaction of learned tri grant the FIR co- amed in been vide 024 and the fact qua him e of the till date, remote, ny other further 1 of the also be is an ra). subject ed trial GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Court/Duty following c 9. that in case -45135-2025 -5 t/Duty Magistrate concerned. The wing conditions:- (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 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 5- The petitioner shall abide by th 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 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 not 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 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 by the during e the prior the which oerce, ith the g such ith the berty. obile ge the eason, same Trial n each der of other g the de clear shall be GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- at liberty t order. 10. herein are l construed a independen 06.11.2025 gbs -45135-2025 -6 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 .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 6- ail as granted to the petitioner by th t is clarified that the observations mad f present proceedings and would not b s of the case and the trial would procee ns. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No by this ns made d not be proceed NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document