CRM-M-12802-2025 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM-12802-2025 Date of Decision:-24.07.2025 Vikash @ Vikas @ Vicky. ......Petitioner. Vs. State of Haryana. ......Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present:- Mr. Ashim Singla, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. T.P. Singh, Sr. DAG Haryana. *** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL) The Prayer in this petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for grant of the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.279 dated 09.09.2023 under Sections 307, 323, 324, 34, 506 IPC (Offence under Section 325, 201 IPC added later on and offence under Section 34 IPC deleted later on) registered at Police Station IMT Rohtak, District Rohtak. 2. As per the allegations the petitioner, Sonu and Anita assaulted the complainant. During the investigation Sonu and Anita were found to be innocent and the report under Section 173(2) Cr.PC was presented against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had been falsely implicated in the present case. The injuries suffered by the complainant have wrongly been declared dangerous to life. The complainant-injured already stands discharged after undergoing treatment. As the petitioner has been in custody since 14.12.2023 but none of the 23 Pws have been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded any time soon and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail. VINAY MAHAJAN 2025.07.24 17:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12802-2025 #2# 4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2023 and none of the 23 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is a first time offender, in custody since 14.12.2023 and none of the 23 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 7. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Vikash @ Vikas @ Vicky son of Sh. Ballu is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. The petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.25,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause. 9. The petitions stand disposed of. ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI ) JUDGE July 24, 2025 Vinay Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No VINAY MAHAJAN 2025.07.24 17:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document