IN THE 208 Mukul @ Manjeet State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Ms. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The the Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 302, 307, Station Sadar Rewari, 2. Learned that the petitioner’s co-accused Sandeep been granted by 68356-2025. He Yadav is concerned, no recovery of any He further contends one Sonu who prosecution. He 3. Learned that the case of THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10037 Date of decision: Manjeet VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD Mr. Himmat Singh Deol, Advocate for Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Astt. AG, Haryana ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The present second petition has been Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.172 dated 16.09.2023 307, 342 and 149 of the Indian Rewari, District Rewari. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf petitioner’s case stands on a better footing Sandeep Yadav to whom concession by this Court vide order dated 09.12. He further contends that insofar as concerned, recovery of a belt had been any nature whatsoever has been contends that the entire prosecution case has turned hostile and has not submits that the petitioner is not Learned State Counsel does not dispute of the petitioner can be materially PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 10037-2025(O&M) decision: 13.01.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ for the petitioner. Haryana. been filed under Section 483 of for grant of regular bail to the 16.09.2023 registered under Penal Code, 1860 at Police behalf of the petitioner contends footing as compared to that of the concession of regular bail has already 09.12.2025 passed in CRM-M- the said co-accused Sandeep been effected from him, whereas, effected from the petitioner. case is based on statement of not supported the case of the not involved in any other case. dispute the aforesaid facts or materially distinguished from the co- SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.01.14 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 208 CRM-M-10037-2025(O&M) accused Sandeep Yadav to whom concession of regular bail has already been granted by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 passed in CRM-M- 68356-2025. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petition. 5. In view of the facts noticed above and taking into consideration that co-accused Sandeep Yadav has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 passed in CRM-M- 68356-2025, thus with a view to extend parity and keeping the case of the present petitioner at par with the co-accused, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 6. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 7. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 8. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 13.01.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.01.14 12:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document