CRM-M-48639-2024 -1- 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-48639-2024 Date of Decision:10.07.2025 BEERU ALIAS SINDER SINGH …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF HARYANA …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Ms. Shivani Jaglan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.260 dated 04.09.2023, registered under Sections 25 of Arms Act, and Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 506 of IPC (Section 307 of IPC added later on), Police Station Sadar Safidon, District Jind. 2. Mr. Mayur Karkra, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant by filing his power of attorney, which is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had applied for bail earlier, which was withdrawn on 04.07.2024 (Annexure P-10). Now, the complainant has been examined by the prosecution, who did not support the version of the FIR. Moreover, similarly placed co-accused Akash @ VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.11 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-48639-2024 -2- Dadu, Sonu @ Abja, Vinod, Shiv Kumar, Surajmal and Sonu have been granted the concession of bail by trial Court. In changed circumstances, the petitioner has filed the second petition for grant of concession of bail before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the initial version, the present petitioner was carrying a gandasi and give two blows on the head of Ramsukh @ Sukha. The said injuries were declared to be dangerous to life as per the medical opinion. However, during the course of investigation, it was discovered that Akash @ Dadu was the principal accused and the petitioner had just pointed pistol on the injured and did not cause any injury to him. She further contends that the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 04.01.2024 and is in custody for the last more than 01 year and 06 months. By referring to the orders Annexures P-4 to P-8, learned counsel submits that Akash @ Dadu, Sonu @ Abja, Vinod, Shiv Kumar, Surajmal and Sonu have been admitted to bail by the trial Court. Thus on parity also the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is a hardened criminal and is facing 05 more cases and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. Learned counsel further submit that as per the initial version, the main injury, which led to the addition of the offence under Section 307 IPC was attributed to him and he was armed with a lethal weapon. However, learned counsel could not dispute that several co-accused, who are similarly placed have already been admitted to bail and the complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution. VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.11 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-48639-2024 -3- 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 6. In the present case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last 01 year and 06 months. The material witnesses have been examined by the prosecution and if released on bail, the petitioner may not be in a position to tamper with the prosecution. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 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 10.07.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.11 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order