CRM-M-67911- IN THE H (135) RAHUL CHHIK STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. D Mr. N MANISHA BATR 1. The under Section 48 “BNSS”) for gran 23.03.2025 regist Sanhita, 2023 (for and Section 105 District Jhajjar. withdrawn. 2. The 103(1) read with -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH HIKARA Versus HARYANA AND ANR. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Deepender Singh, Sr. Advocate w Mr. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate for t Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant one is the second petitio on 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surak r grant of regular bail in case arisi registered under Sections 103(1) 23 (for short “BNS”) (Section 103(1) 105 of BNS was added) at Polic jjar. His first bearing CRM-M-34 The aforementioned FIR was initia with Section 3(5) of BNS, on the JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-67911-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.03.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondents ANISHA BATRA cate with e for the petitioner petition preferred by the petitioner Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short e arising out of FIR No.076 dated (1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya 103(1) & 3(5) of BNS were deleted Police Station Sadar Bahadugarh, 34698-2025 was dismissed as initially registered under Section n the basis of a written complaint M) 2026 oner s ioner short ated yaya leted garh, d as ction laint AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.25 13:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67911- submitted by the c 02 sisters and she Her brother was i land. For this pur present petitioner. to her matrimoni complainant had t their family memb same could be so started telling her land to him. He brother refused to brother, the petitio to his village abo received informat their agricultural l floating in the wel alleged that she ha petitioner alongwi occurrence. By fur and the above-sai taking action in th 3. After The post-mortem -2025 (O&M) 2 y the complainant Sunita alleging there nd she herself owned some agricultur was interested to sell his house in t is purpose, some deal was going on w tioner. The petitioner alongwith one y rimonial house at Village Bakner a t had told her brother to firstly offer to members and suggested that if none be sold to anyone else. The petitio g her brother that he had back-tracke . He insisted for making payment of sed to do so and then by extending thr petitioner had left. Her brother had s ge about 2-3 days thereafter. In the ormation that her brother had been d tural land. On reaching there she foun he well. There were marks of injuries she had made inquiries at her level ongwith her brother and Amit were pr By further alleging that her brother ha said Amit and then was drowned n in the matter. After registration of FIR, investigatio ortem of the dead body of the vic g therein that her brother Pawan, her ricultural land in Village Kanaunda. se in the village and the above-said g on with a co-villager-Rahul i.e. the one youth and her brother had come ner about 15-20 days back. The ffer to sell their property to some of f none was interested only then the petitioner felt offended at this and tracked from his promise to sell his ent of some earnest money but her ing threats and hurling abuses to her r had stayed with her and went back In the morning of 23.03.2025, she been drowned in a well existing in e found the dead body of her brother juries on his head. The complainant evel and had come to know that the ere present at the spot at the time of ther had been killed by the petitioner rowned in the well, she prayed for stigation proceedings were initiated. he victim was conducted. During , her nda. said . the ome The e of the and ll his t her o her back , she g in other inant t the e of ioner d for ated. uring AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.25 13:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67911- investigation, the The petitioner w disclosure stateme Section 103(1) wa Section 105 of BN 4. It is a been falsely impl recorded under S altercation that ha only given a fist b fallen in the well. was the petitioner well. There is tota death of the victim The allegations suspicions. He is considerable time Now challan has b not have any inte would be served clean. It is, therefo 5. Status the petition being -2025 (O&M) 3 n, the statement of Amit under Sectio ner was arrested on 27.03.2025. O tatement admitting his involvement (1) was deleted during the course of in of BNS was added. Investigation now It is argued by learned Senior counse implicated in this case. The state der Section 183 of BNSS clearly that had taken place between the peti a fist blow to him. The victim, howe well. PW Amit had even jumped into tioner who with the help of other pers is total absence of mens rea on the pa victim. The complainant was not an as narrated in the FIR are entire He is in custody for a period of almo e time to conclude. He is not requ n has been presented under Section 10 y intention to commit murder of th erved by detaining him in custody a therefore, urged that the petitioner des Status report has been filed. Learned being a successive one is not maintai Section 183 of BNSS was recorded. 25. On interrogation, he suffered ment in the crime. Offence under se of investigation and offence under on now stands concluded. counsel for the petitioner that he has statement of eye-witness Amit as learly shows that during a verbal e petitioner and the victim, he had , however, had lost balance and had ed into the well to save the victim. It er persons had taken Amit out of the the part of the petitioner for causing ot an eye-witness to the occurrence. entirely based on assumptions and f almost a year. The trial will take t required for further investigation. ion 105 of BNS showing that he did of the victim. No useful purpose tody anymore. His antecedents are er deserves to be released on bail. earned State counsel has argued that ntainable as there is no change in rded. fered nder nder e has it as erbal had had . It f the sing ence. and take tion. e did pose s are that ge in AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.25 13:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67911- the circumstances serious allegations victim since the la back. The petitio knew how to swim the well by stumb the dead body of petitioner had first into the well by th and PW Amit ar intimidating them does not deserve to 6. This C for the parties at co 7. So fa successive petition give some lucid a drastic change in on 15.10.2025 an substantive or dras on this very groun the petitioner is al well in question. -2025 (O&M) 4 tances from his previous petition. It i gations against the petitioner. He had the latter had refused to sell his lan petitioner did not make any attempt to wim and could have certainly saved stumbling, however, it was not so. S dy of the victim which are clearly s ad firstly been assaulted and caused in l by the petitioner. The material witn mit are yet to be examined. There them. With these broad submission erve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. So far as the aspect of maintainabilit ion for grant of bail is maintainable lucid and substantive reasons for fili ge in the circumstances. The petitio 25 and thereafter this petition had b or drastic change in the circumstances ground, the petition cannot be stated r is alleged to have assaulted the victi tion. He had fallen into the well. The n. It is further argued that there are e had animus to cause death of the is land to the petitioner a few days mpt to save the victim. The victim y saved himself, if he had fallen into so. Several injuries were found on early suggestive of the fact that the sed injuries and then he was thrown al witnesses namely the complainant There are chances of petitioner’s issions, it is urged that the petition ubmissions made by learned counsel nability of the petition is concerned, ainable, however, the petitioner must for filing the same alongwith some petitioner withdrew his first petition had been filed on 29.11.2025. No tances has also been pointed out and stated to be maintainable. Moreso, e victim on the fateful night near the ll. The allegations prima facie make e are f the days ictim into d on t the rown inant ner’s tition unsel rned, must some tition No t and reso, r the ake AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.25 13:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-67911- out a case for com knowing the resu therein, still chos nature. The trial i the witnesses cann show that there wo into consideration opinion that the p compelling ground dismissed. 8. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 9. Since any, is rendered in 24.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 5 or commission of subject offence as ag e result of his pushing the victim ne l chose to push him. The allegation trial is at its nascent stage. The con s cannot be stated to be unfounded. ere would be any undue delay in the c eration the above discussed facts, th t the petitioner does not deserve to be ground to allow the petition is made o It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No e as against the petitioner who while tim near the well could be his fall egations against him are serious in e contention that he may intimidate nded. There is nothing on record to n the conclusion of the trial. Taking cts, this Court is of the considered to be extended benefit of bail. No made out. Accordingly, the same is e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No hile fall us in idate rd to king ered No e is l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.25 13:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.