CRM-M-30679-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 239 (two cases) CRM-M-30679-2025 Date of Decision: 03.07.2025 (1) Rajat Vij ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CRM-M-30871-2025 (2) Shubham Chauhan and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present : Mr. Bhupender Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Rupinder Singh Jhand, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** N.S.SHEKHAWAT , J. (Oral) 1. This order shall dispose off two bail petitions, i.e., CRM- M-30679-2025 titled as “Rajat Vij Vs. State of Haryana” and CRM-M-30871-2025 titled as “Shubham Chauhan and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana”, whereby, the petitioner(s) have applied for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in case FIR No.970 dated 19.12.2024 under Sections 109(1), 126, 190, 191(3), 324(4) of BNS, 2023 and Section 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, 1959 (Section 61 and 126(2) of BNS, added later on) registered at Police Station Karnal City, District Karnal. VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.04 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-30679-2025 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the petitioner(s) have been falsely involved in the present case. In fact, Sagar, a friend of Parveen @ Kallu had got one FIR No.289 dated 27.05.2024 under Sections 506, 341, 324, 323, 148, 149 of IPC (Section 325, 308 of IPC added later on) registered against the complainant and his accomplices. Just to take revenge, the complainant got the FIR registered by levelling false allegations against several persons. Even it has been alleged that Rajat had fired shots from a pistol, however, no one was injured in the incident. He further contends that even in fact Rajat Vij, Shubham Chauhan, Sagar and Nitin @ Nanu were arrested on 19.12.2024, 15.01.2025, 15.01.2025 and 12.01.2025 and are in custody since then. He further contends that vide order Annexure P-3, co-accused Harsh Chopra @ Golu has been granted the concession of bail by this Court and the petitioner(s) are almost on similar footings. Even co-accused Parveen Kumar has also been granted the concession of bail by this Court on 15.05.2025. The challan has already been presented against the petitioners and their custody is no longer required for any other purpose. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner(s) on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioners and they do not deserve the concession of bail by VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.04 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-30679-2025 this Court. He further contends that two more criminal cases have been registered against Nitin @ Nanu, one of the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In the present case, co-accused Parveen @ Kallu and Harsh Chopra @ Golu have already been admitted to bail by this Court in two separate petitions. The petitioners are in custody for the last almost 06 months and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner(s) will not serve any useful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner(s) are ordered to be released on bail pending trial on their furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. 03.07.2025 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.04 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order