Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 710 (PNJ)

PREETAM v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/68488/2025 · 2026-04-06

Sanjay Vashisth

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-68488-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 124 CRM-M-68488-2025 Decided on : 06.04.2026 Preetam . . . Petitioner(s) Versus State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present : Mr. Randeep S. Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G. Haryana **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station Preetam, aged 39 years 288 22.08.2024 103(1), 238(A), 315, 241, 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 25, 27 and 29 of Arms Act, 1959 Sampla, District Rohtak 2. Learned State counsel on instructions from PSI Balwinder points out that as per allegations there were two accused-Suraj and Chankit, who fired shot upon Dinesh and killed him. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith co-accused-Karan, Chankit and Suraj tied the body of the deceased and thereupon REENA 2026.04.07 03:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-68488-2025 the shots were fired. After his death body was thrown near the sewerage of the bridge. During investigation, prosecution come out with another piece of circumstantial evidence that room where all the accused stayed booked in Haridwar, was in the name of petitioner and amount was withdrawn by accused Chankit through ATM linked with the account of deceased Dinesh. The pistol recovered from co-accused Suraj was found matched with the bullet recovered from the body of the deceased. He also informs that at first instance it was petitioner, who was arrested in the case as room was booked in his name and thereafter, he disclosed names of other two co-accused namely Suraj and Chankit also. 3. The petitioner is inside jail for the last 01 year, 06 months and 18 days, therefore, no ground for bail is made out at this stage. 4. Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition at this stage. 5. The petition is dismissed as not pressed at this stage. April 06, 2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE reena Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No REENA 2026.04.07 03:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh