CRM-M-67954- IN THE H (236) AJAY PAL SING STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. MANISHA BATR 1. The p Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S (for short “BNS” 2. As pe in connivance wit while extending th sum of Rs.2,60,00 kept the victim co to the Police by t -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH SINGH RAGHAV @ AJAY PAL R Versus
HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Aman Arora, Advocate for the pe Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 127(2), 140(2), 3(4) of ”) at Police Station City Ballabhga As per the allegations, on 14.08.2024 ce with the petitioner, abducted the co ding threats to him took him to his h ,60,000/-, otherwise threatened to kill tim confined in his room and it was o e by the brother of the complainant t JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-67954-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 02.02.2026 AL RAGHAV ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA
the petitioner aryana preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.518 dated 15.08.2024 4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 labhgarh, District Faridabad. .2024, the co-accused Ashok Tailor, the complainant Kunal Paswan and o his house and raised demand of a to kill him. The petitioner had also was only on intimation being given inant that he was released from the M) 2026 oner
dent
nder ) 2024 2023 , and of a also iven the AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.03 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67954- custody of the pe 16.08.2024. Inves 3. It is a falsely implicated for further investig useful purpose wo therefore, stressed 4. Status counsel. It is argu against the petitio committing simila that the petition do 5. This both the parties. 6. The p the victim and ha manner. He is in is no likelihood of prosecution witne served by detaini proposition of law conviction senten Taking into consid -2025 (O&M) 2 the petitioner and the co-accused. T Investigation now stands completed. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. He is in custody s nvestigation. The trial will take consi ose would be served by detaining him ressed that the petitioner deserves to be Status report and custody certificate h is argued by learned State counsel tha petitioner. There are chances of int similar offences, if extended benefit o tion does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival subm The petitioner alongwith the co-accus and have extended threats to him, a is in custody for a period of 01 year 0 ood of conclusion of the trial in the ne witnesses has been examined so far. detaining the petitioner in custody of law that pre-trial incarceration sho sentence and that even bail is the r consideration his clean antecedents, t ed. The petitioner was arrested on leted. l for the petitioner that he has been stody since long. He is not required considerable time to conclude. No ing him in custody anymore. It is, es to be released on bail. ficate has been filed by learned State sel that there are serious allegations of intimidating the complainant or nefit of bail. It is, therefore, argued l submissions made by counsel for accused is alleged to have abducted him, after confining him in illegal year 05 months and 15 days. There the near future since none out of 23 o far. No useful purpose would be stody anymore. It is well settled n should not be a replica of post- the rule and jail is an exception. ents, the period of incarceration and d on n uired . No It is, State tions nt or gued l for cted legal here of 23 ld be ttled - tion. and AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.03 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67954- the above discuss made out a case petitioner is order well as surety bon Magistrate/Duty M 7. It is cla as an expression o influence the outco 8. Since any, is rendered in 02.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 3 iscussed facts, this Court is of the o case for grant of bail. Accordingly, t ordered to be released on bail subjec ty bonds to the satisfaction of the lea uty Magistrate concerned. t is clarified that the observations mad sion of opinion of this Court on the m e outcome of the trial in any manner. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous.
(MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
the opinion that the petitioner has ngly, the petition is allowed and the subject to his furnishing personal as he learned trial Court/Chief Judicial s made above shall not be construed the merits of the case and shall not nner. een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
r has d the al as icial trued ll not n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.03 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.