CRA-S-744-2025 (O&M) -1- 216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-744-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.07.2025 DHRUV ALIAS LOVELY ...Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present:- Mr. S. S. Nain, Advocate and Ms. Tanya Vashist, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Kashyap, DAG, Haryana. **** JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral) CRM-9175-2025 Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of 77 days in filing the present appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application and there being no objection from the learned State counsel, the same is allowed and the delay of 77 days in filing the present appeal, is hereby condoned. CRA-S-744-2025 1. The present is an appeal filed by the appellant challenging the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Faridabad dated 17.09.2024, vide which the application for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant was dismissed. CHETAN THAKUR 2025.07.04 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-744-2025 (O&M) -2- 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is in custody for about 1 year and 4 months and the prosecution evidence has already been started and the prosecutrix already stands examined. He further submitted that the appellant is exactly at parity with one of the other co-accused, namely, Abhimanyu, who has since been granted the benefit of regular bail by this Court in CRA-S-3269-2024 vide order dated 29.01.2025 (Annexure P-6). He further submitted that the allegations against the appellant were with regard to aiding the main co-accused, who was juvenile and same was the position with regard to the aforesaid co-accused, namely, Abhimanyu, who has been granted the benefit of regular bail as aforesaid. He further submitted that the total custody of aforesaid co-accused, namely, Abhimanyu at the time of grant of regular bail was 10 months and 15 days and so far as the present appellant is concerned, he has been in custody for about 1 year and 4 months and therefore, he is also entitled for grant of regular bail on the ground of parity. 3. On the last date of hearing i.e. 07.04.2025, learned State counsel had sought time to file an affidavit regarding the parity aspect with respect to the aforesaid co-accused. 4. Today, Mr. Vishal Kashyap, DAG, Haryana has filed status report by way of an affidavit of Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mujeser, Faridabad and the same is taken on record. He has submitted on instructions from SI Harish Kumar that the appellant is exactly at parity with the aforesaid co-accused, namely, Abhimanyu, who has been granted the benefit of regular bail by this Court vide Annexure P-6. He further submitted that so far as the custody of the appellant is concerned, the same is not in dispute. CHETAN THAKUR 2025.07.04 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRA-S-744-2025 (O&M) -3- 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant deserves the concession of regular bail. 6. Consequently, the present appeal is allowed. The order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Faridabad, is hereby set aside. The appellant shall be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 7. Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of since the main case has been decided. 8. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and is meant for the purpose of deciding the present appeal only. (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) 03.07.2025 JUDGE Chetan Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No CHETAN THAKUR 2025.07.04 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.