CRM-M- IN T 242 Pankaj Vers State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. registered a 201, 34 of Karnal, has BNSS. 2. noticed her filed a com brother, na working in since the la -66447-2025 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ CHANDIGA Versus of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocat Mr. Vishal Singh, Assistant Ad **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in case tered against him, under Section 346 34 of Indian Penal Code (added late , has filed the present petition for g Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- One Parveen Mann, son of J complaint pointing therein that r, namely, Ravinder, whose house is g in VRC Company inside the Refin he last night. Complainant also cam 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-66447-2025 Date of Decision: 09.02.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. dvocate for the petitioner. tant Advocate General, Haryana. n case FIR No. 142 dated 19.05.202 346 (deleted later on), Sections 30 ed later on), at Police Station Muna for grant of bail under Section 483 o ging from the documents on record b of Joginder Mann, resident of Ball hat his uncle’s son, i.e., his cous se is adjacent to his house and who Refinery, has not returned back hom came to know from neighbours th .2026 .2024, ns 302, Munak, 483 of cord be Balla, cousin who is home rs that GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- clothes, mo Road ahea clothes of nearby. He brother and complaint, under Secti handset, m Several per day, i.e., o Parallel Ca brother of t examinatio the body w handed ove taken into p Singh. 15.6.2024, that at abo village to s Tejbir Sing (present pe village Mu by Pankaj -66447-2025 -2 , mobile phone, keys of vehicle of head of the Gaushala Ballah. Whe of Ravinder as also his bike, but un . He (c) requested the police author r and also gave his physical identifi int, a formal case vide FIR No. 142 Section 346, at Police Station Munak During interrogation, the artic set, motorcycle, clothes of Ravinder ral persons were questioned but no cl i.e., on 20.5.2024, body of missing llel Canal in Samalkha, which was er of the deceased. Inquest proceedin ination on the body of deceased was ody was handed over to the family ed over by the Doctors after the pos into possession. Remaining investiga It is further the case of prosec 024, one Dilbagh, son of Sube Sing t about 8/8.30 PM on 18.5.2024, h to serve fodder to the cows. After w Singh. At about 2.40 am, when he w nt petitioner), and Ravi @ Kamal al Munak. All the three were on a m kaj (present petitioner) and Ravind 2- e of Ravinder were found at Muna When he arrived at the spot, he foun ut unfortunately did not find Ravind thorities to look around for his cous ntification details. Based on the sa 142 dated 19.05.2024, was registere unak, Karnal. e articles recovered, i.e., mobile phon inder etc. were taken into possessio t no clue was found. On the followin ssing Ravinder was found in the Del was identified by Bhupender Sing ceedings were conducted, post morte was also got conducted, after whic mily for performing last rites. Article he post mortem examination were als vestigation was carried out by SI Ranb osecution that during investigation o Singh stated to the police authoriti 24, he had gone to Gaushala of h fter which he had gone to the fields he was returning back, he saw Pank al along with Ravinder going toward a motorcycle which was being drive vinder (since deceased) was sitting unak found vinder cousin e said stered phone, session. llowing e Delhi Singh, mortem r which Articles also I Ranbir ion on orities of his elds of ankaj wards driven ting in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- between. H Ravi @ Ka said statem were added were arrest the commis the reason deceased, 986981625 possession. was pushed petitioner, deposited w The reason Ravinder done to dea made a ‘ deleted. T petitioner a awaited. dismissed dated 17.10 -66447-2025 -3 n. He, thus, suspected that probabl Kamal had some role to play dea atement, Sections 302, 201 read with dded. Both Ravi @ Kamal and pr rrested on 15.6.2025. During interrogation, petitione ommission of offence, elaborated upo reasons/motive as to why they wer ased, mobile phone handset (make 816258 recovered at the instance of ession. The exact place where the de pushed into canal, was identified by ioner, who also got recovered the m sited with the MHC. Case of the prosecution is bas reason why the petitioner and co-accus has been highlighted as also the to death. It further emerges that both ‘video’ while Ravinder was dro ed. This mobile phone handset was ioner and was sent to the CFSL for r Petitioner moved an applicati issed by the learned Additional Ses 10.2025. Aggrieved of the same 3- bably Pankaj (present petitioner) an death of Ravinder. On the basis with Section 34 of Indian Penal Cod d present petitioner, namely, Pank titioner confessed to his involvement ed upon the sequence of events as als y were nursing a grudge against th (make OPPO) along with SIM N ce of present petitioner was taken in the deceased was hit with the rod an ied by both the accused including th the motorcycle. Case property wa is based on “circumstantial evidence accused were nursing a grudge again lso the manner in which Ravinder wa t both, petitioner and co-accused ha as drowning which was subsequent t was recovered at the instance of th L for retrieving the data; report is sti plication for grant of bail, which wa al Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide ord same, present petition has been filed. and asis of l Code ankaj ment in as also inst the IM No. ken into rod and ing the rty was idence”. against was sed had quently e of the t is still was e order GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3. been falsel prosecution part of peti arresting p forth by th counsel for the petition drowning w FSL report ante morte petitioner w to be taken been exami near future 4. State couns incident. T Circumstan the petition were ‘last s petitioner f with the co counsel tha overawing end, learne -66447-2025 -4 Learned counsel for the petit falsely implicated in the present case cution is nothing but a bundle of lies of petitioner to kill Ravinder. Further ting petitioner raises a serious doubt by the prosecution. Thus, the crux o sel for petitioner is that there is no in petitioner with the commission of o ning which fact stands corroborated w report, as per which late Ravinder die ortem drowning”. Towards the en ioner who has been in custody since taken in his favour, for out of 25 pr examined till date and thus, the possib future is quite remote. Prayer for allow Per contra, while opposing the counsel submits that there being ‘no ent. The case of the prosecution is b mstances relied upon by the prosecut etitioner to commit the offence, the last seen together’ by PW Dilbagh Si ioner from which the data has to be ret the commission of offence. It is furth sel that if extended the concession awing complainant and related witne learned State counsel contends that 4- e petitioner submits that petitioner ha nt case. The story as portrayed by th of lies. There was no ‘motive’ on th her, unexplained delay of 27 days doubt on the genuineness of story p crux of submissions raised by learne s no incriminating evidence connectin n of offence. Deceased died due rated with the Post Mortem Report an der died due to “asphyxia secondary e end, learned counsel contends th ince 15.6.2025, deserves a lenient vie prosecution witnesses, only 2 ha possibility of completion of trial in th r allowing the petition was made. ing the request for grant of bail, learne g ‘no eye witness account’ of the trag on is based on circumstantial evidenc osecution as in ‘Motive’ on the part o e, the fact that petitioner and decease agh Singh, recovery of mobile phone o be retrieved by CFSL, connect accuse s further the submission of learned Sta ssion of bail, likelihood of petition witnesses is quite high. Towards th s that in view of the seriousness an ner has by the on the days in tory put learned necting due to port and ary to nds that nt view have al in the learned e tragic vidence. part of eceased hone of accused ed State etitioner ards the ess and GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- gravity of o for grant of 5. documents 6. but without at this stage being devo 09.02.2026 gbs -66447-2025 -5 of offence and the allegations level of bail is made out. Dismissal of t Heard learned counsel for th ments on record. In view of the submissions ad ithout commenting on the merits of th is stage, no case for grant of bail is ma devoid of any merit is hereby dismiss .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 5- s levelled against the petitioner, no cas sal of the petition has been made. for the parties and have perused th ons advanced by learned State counse ts of the case, lest it may prejudice tria l is made out. Accordingly, the petitio ismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No no case sed the counsel, ice trial, petition NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document