CRM-M-28088-2025 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28088-2025 Reserved on: 6th August, 2025 Pronounced on: 18 th August, 2025 Rajan ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. S.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Himani Arora, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. *** MANISHA BATRA, J :- The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 47 dated 28.11.2024 registered under Sections 3(5), 118(1) and 118(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station GRP Sirsa, District GRP Ambala Cantt. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Aman Kumar on 18.11.2024, alleging therein that he used to do work of plastic of Paris as a labourer with one Firoz @ Foji. Firoz @ Foji had to pay some money to him but was putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. On 25.11.2024, Firoz @ Foji called him on phone and asked him to reach near electricity transformer and take his money. When the complainant reached there, he found Firoz @ Parveen Sharma 2025.08.20 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28088-2025 2- Fozi to be present there along with co-accused Suraj, Naresh and the present petitioner Rajan @ Dippu Bagdi. They were armed with weapons. On his reaching there, they opened an assault upon him and caused injuries to him with their respective weapons. He raised clamour and tried to flee but was caught by accused Suraj. He became unconscious and was admitted in hospital by his family members later on. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. As many as 10 injuries were found on the person of the complainant, 06 of which were opined to be grievous in nature. The petitioner was arrested on 07.01.2025 along with the co-accused Firoz Khan. He got recovered the sword used by him in the crime. The other co-accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. No specific injury has been attributed to him. The injuries on the person of the victim are on non-vital parts of the body. He has been in custody since 07.01.2025. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. The subject offences are triable by Magistrate. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. Therefore, it is, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Status report has been filed by respondent-State. It is argued by learned State counsel that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and therefore, he does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. 5. Rival contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties have been considered. 6. The petitioner, in furtherance of his common intention with the co-accused, is alleged to have assaulted the complainant and to have caused Parveen Sharma 2025.08.20 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28088-2025 3- simple as well as grievous injuries to him. He has been in custody since 07.01.2025. Charges have been framed against the petitioner. Trial has commenced but will take time to conclude since none of the witnesses has been examined so far. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Keeping in view of the above discussed facts but without meaning to make any comments upon the merits of the case lest the same prejudice the trial, this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for release on bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds by two sureties to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 8. Since the main petition has been allowed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. [MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE 18 th August, 2025 Parveen Sharma 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No Parveen Sharma 2025.08.20 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document