Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1621 (PNJ)

RAMESHWAR ALIAS PINKU v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/66569/2025 · 2026-03-05

Manisha Batra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-66569- IN THE H (135-1) RAMESHWAR @ STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. H MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Sections 31 short “BNS”) and Jatusana, District R 2. As pe received that 4-5 p Village Berli to D -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH  AR @ PINKU Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Lalit Pardhan, Advocate for the p Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana ****  BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case arising out of FIR No.19 ons 310(4), 310(5), 310(6) of Bharat ”) and Sections 25(1A) and 25 of istrict Rewari. As per the allegations, on 09/10.12.2 5 persons were present in a tubew li to Dehlawas. They were armed wit JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-66569-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.03.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA  r the petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 190 dated 10.12.2024 registered Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for 25 of Arms Act at Police Station 0.12.2024, a secret information was tubewell room on the kacha rasta of ed with weapons and were planning M) 2026 oner dent ction grant tered (for ation was ta of ning AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66569- to commit similar apprehended, if ra a raiding party apprehended the a Lali, Raj, Mukes countrymade pisto effected from them suffered disclosur supplied to them petitioner was arre subsequently. Inv 3. It is a falsely implicated accused which can has been effected The trial will take served by detainin cannot be conside thus, argued that th 4. Per c against the petitio the co-accused. T -2025 (O&M) 2 imilar offence of dacoity. It was als d, if raid was conducted. Believing the party was formed which reached d the accused Devender @ Subhash @ Mukesh @ Ramu and Prem Pal e pistols, live cartridges, torches, iron m them. They were formally arrested. closure statements to the effect that t them by the present petitioner an as arrested on 11.12.2024. The co-acc Investigation now stands completed It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case on the basis of the d ich cannot be considered to be admiss fected at his instance. He is not requ ll take considerable time to conclude. etaining him in custody anymore. H onsidered to be a reason for denying that the petition deserves to be allowe Per contra, learned State counsel ha petitioner are serious in nature as he sed. The petitioner is a man of crim as also informed that they could be ing the secret information to be true, ched at the informed place and hash @ Mota, Jagdish @ Lambu @ Pal @ Leela. Recovery of 05 s, iron rods and screw drivers were rested. On interrogation, the accused that the recovered pistols had been and co-accused Jagdish. The accused Jagdish was also arrested pleted. l for the petitioner that he has been f the disclosure statements of the co- dmissible in evidence. No recovery ot required for further investigation. clude. No useful purpose would be re. His involvement in other cases nying benefit of bail to him. It is, allowed. nsel has argued that the allegations as he had supplied the cartridges to of criminal antecedents. There are ld be true, and u @ f 05 re used been The ested been - very tion. ld be cases It is, tions es to e are AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66569- chances of his abs offences, if extend does not deserve to 5. This C for the parties at co 7. The cartridges to the c commission of su custody since 11.1 trial will take con has been examined petitioner in custo the rule and jail is post-conviction se accused during tri above discussed f Accordingly, the p on bail subject t satisfaction of the concerned. -2025 (O&M) 3 his absconding or intimidating the wi extended benefit of bail. It is, there erve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have the co-accused. The allegations pri f subject offences against him. Ho ce 11.12.2024. The investigation stan ke considerable time since only 01 ou amined so far. No useful purpose wo custody anymore. The well settled jail is an exception. Pre-trial incarce tion sentencing. The object of the jail ing trial, and it cannot be preventive ssed facts, the petitioner has made o the petitioner is allowed and the peti ject to his furnishing personal as of the learned trial Court/Chief Judici the witnesses or committing similar , therefore, stressed that the petition ubmissions made by learned counsel have supplied illicit weapons and prima facie make out a case for However, he is continuously in n stands completed. Obviously the 01 out of 12 prosecution witnesses se would be served by detaining the ttled proposition of law is that bail is ncarceration should not be replica of he jail is to secure appearance of the entive or punitive. In view of the ade out a case for release on bail. e petitioner is ordered to be released al as well as surety bonds to the Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate ar tition unsel and e for ly in y the esses g the ail is ca of f the f the bail. ased the trate AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66569- 8. In the petitioners, it shall application seekin 9. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 10. Since any, is rendered in 05.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 4 In the event of there being any FIR it shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes    y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner.  allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) Yes/No  t the g an l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.