257 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35552-2025 Date of Decision:28.07.2025 Narsi …Petitioner vs. State of Haryana …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Naresh Kumar Ganga, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of B.N.S.S with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.259 dated 15.04.2023 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 506 of IPC and Section 395, 397 of IPC added later on, at Police Station, City Sirsa, District Sirsa. 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Lalan Yadav son of Tula Yadav, by alleging that at about 10.50 p.m. on 14.04.2023, he was taking rest in Ambar Hotel and 7-8 unknown persons came there duly armed and attacked on him. During the scuffle, the mobile phone make Vivo of the complainant carrying SIM No.95184-10789 was not found and it had fallen during the fight. He requested for taking legal action against 7-8 unknown persons and with these broad allegations, the FIR in the present case was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was HITESH 2025.07.29 07:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-35552-2025 -2 not named in the present FIR and no physical description of any of the accused was mentioned in the FIR. However, without collecting any incriminating evidence against him, he was wrongly arrested by the police on 15.06.2023. Learned counsel further contends that there was no previous enmity between both the sides and there was no question of causing injuries to the injured. He further submits that the offences under Section 395/397 have been wrongly added in the present case, just to make the offences graver. Learned counsel further contends that challan has already been presented against the present petitioner and his further custody will serve no meaningful purpose. He further contends that the petitioner is a first offender and deserve sympathetic consideration by this Court. He next contends that similarly placed co-accused Kuldeep Singh, Amarjeet Singh and Sachin have been admitted to bail by this court vide Annexures P-3 to P-5. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that there are serious allegations against him. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 6. In the present case, the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 15.06.2023 and is in custody sine then. It is also not disputed that the injuries suffered by the complainant were simple in nature and the recovery has already been effected during the course of investigation. Challan has already been presented against him and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. Even otherwise, similarly placed co-accused Kuldeep Singh, Amarjeet Singh and Sachin have been admitted to bail by this Court HITESH 2025.07.29 07:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-35552-2025 -3 vide Annexures P-3 to P-5. 7. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 28.07.2025 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2025.07.29 07:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh