CRM-M-73639- IN THE H (133) ARJUN @ BAWA STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. R Mr. MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under Bharatiya Nyaya S District Jhajjar. 2. Brief are that previousl Gaurav, his cousi were hailing from Pawan and caused companions had a -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH BAWANIA Versus
HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS . Robin Singh Hooda, Advocate fo Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh f regular bail in case arising out of nder Sections 109(1), 115, 140(1), yaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS” Brief relevant facts for the purpose o viously an altercation had taken pla cousin brother Pawan, wherein Har from the village of the complainant h caused injuries to him. On 15.04.2 had assaulted Amit, who was friend JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-73639-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.02.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
ANISHA BATRA
cate for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.91 dated 17.04.2025 40(1), 190, 191(3) and 61 of the ”) at Police Station City Jhajjar, rpose of the disposal of this petition en place between the complainant in Harish, Vikas and Naveen, who inant himself and who had assaulted 5.04.2025, the complainant and his friend of above-named Harish etc. M) 2026 nder ) 2025 f the ajjar, tition inant who ulted d his etc. CRM-M-73639- The complainant had reached at Bh petitioner alongwi No.HR-05-BL-719 Scorpio vehicle, d but the complain stadium. The as motorbike. They vehicle and took beatings with lath him in their vehic siren of the police treatment. Afte registered. Inves custody in some o warrants and was petitioner suffered used in the occurre 3. It is a falsely implicated act has been attrib and Nitin have alr to be extended th -2025 (O&M) 2 inant recorded that on 17.04.2025, h at Bhagat Singh Chowk on the bike o ongwith the co-accused reached there 7199 being being driven by him icle, due to which, his friend Kartik an plainant still tried to flee on his moto he assailants followed him in the They alighted from their vehicle, fo took him to some abandoned hous lathis and dandas. While consider vehicle with intent to throw him som police vehicle, they fled. He was taken After recording his statement, th Investigation proceedings were initi ome other case and his presence was d was formally arrested on 21.05. uffered disclosure statement and got ccurrence. Investigation now stands c It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. He is in custody s attributed to him. The co-accused already been extended benefit of b ded the same benefit. His involvem 025, he alongwith his friend Kartik bike of his friend Vikram, when the d there in a Scorpio vehicle bearing him. His motorbike was hit with artik and he himself had fallen down motorbike and reached towards the in their vehicle and again hit his cle, forcibly pulled him inside their house, wherein he was extended nsidering him to be dead, they kept somewhere. However, on hearing s taken to the hospital and was given nt, the aforementioned FIR was e initiated. The petitioner was in e was secured by way of production 21.05.2025. On interrogation, the d got recovered one wooden stick tands completed. l for the petitioner that he has been stody since 21.05.2025. No specific used Sahil, Navdeep, Ankush, Ritik it of bail. On parity, he too deserves olvement in other cases cannot be artik n the aring with own s the t his their nded kept aring iven was as in ction , the stick been cific Ritik erves t be CRM-M-73639- considered to be incarceration wou the petition deserv 4. Learn that the petitioner are serious and s intimidating the therefore, argued t 6. This C at considerable len 7. The p membership of an thereof have caus However, no spec custody since 21. since no prosecut purpose would be well settled propo trial incarceration object of the jail is be preventive or p but without meani -2025 (O&M) 3 to be a reason for denying benefit n would not serve any useful purpose deserves to be allowed. Learned State counsel while relying o tioner is a habitual offender being invo and specific allegations against him witnesses or absconding, if ext gued that the petition does not deserve This Court has heard the rival submi ble length. The petitioner alongwith the co-accu of an unlawful assembly and in pr caused simple as well as grievous o specific injury has been attributed 21.05.2025. The trial will take c osecution witness has been examine uld be served by detaining the petitio proposition of law that bail is the rule ration should not be replica of post jail is to secure appearance of the acc e or punitive. Taking into considerat meaning to make any comments on enefit of bail to him. His further urpose. It is, therefore, argued that lying on the status report has argued ng involved in 03 other cases. There st him. There are chances of his if extended benefit of bail. It is, eserve to be allowed. ubmissions made by both the parties accused is alleged to have formed in prosecution of common object ievous injuries to the complainant. ibuted to him. The petitioner is in take considerable time to conclude amined so far. As such no useful petitioner in custody anymore. It is he rule and jail is an exception. Pre- f post-conviction sentencing. The he accused during trial, and it cannot sideration the above discussed facts, ts on the merits of the case lest the rther that gued here f his It is, rties rmed bject nant. is in lude seful It is - The nnot facts, t the CRM-M-73639- same prejudice the is ordered to be r bonds to the Magistrate/Duty M 8. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 9. Since any, is rendered in 24.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 4 ice the trial in any manner, the petitio o be released on bail, subject to his f the satisfaction of the learned uty Magistrate concerned. In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
   petition is allowed and the petitioner o his furnishing personal and surety arned trial Court/Chief Judicial y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
ioner urety icial t the g an n, if