CRM-M-25564-2025 -1- 244 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25564-2025 Date of Decision:15.05.2025 BIJENDER KUMAR …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF HARYANA …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rupinder Singh Jhand, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.359 dated 14.12.2024, registered under Sections 238(b), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340, 61 of BNS, 2023, 12(1)(B) Passports Act, 1967, 13 & 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Baroda, Gohana, District Sonipat. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had no concern with the allegations levelled by the complainant in the present case and has been arrayed as accused on the basis of the disclosure statement suffered by Ankit Narwal, main accused. He next contends that Ankit Narwal, Junaid, Nihal and Sandeep have been granted the concession of bail in the present case. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 08.01.2025 and VIPIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-25564-2025 -2- is in custody for the last about four months. Moreover, out of 38 prosecution witnesses, no witness has been examined so far. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that 05 more FIRs have been ordered to be registered against the present petitioner and he is a hardened criminal and does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. It is an admitted fact that the similarly placed co-accused Ankit Narwal, Junaid, Nihal and Sandeep, Sekhar Jain and Samarjeet Singh have been granted the concession of bail. The petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last about four months. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. 15.05.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order