CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764---- 129 ( 129 ( 129 ( 129 (4444thththth case) case) case) case) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Raj Singh @ Raja State of Haryana Date of Date of Date of Date of Decision Decision Decision Decision Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL grant of regular bail 11.04.2025, registered for the off 190/ 191(3) of the BNS, 2023 Arms Act, 1959 later on), at Police Station Bhiwani City, District Bhiwani 2. Vinod, alleged that Prashant and Sohan towards Dinod Road. Upon reaching near the street of Subhash Halwai in Brijvasi Colony, Parde ----2026 2026 2026 2026 case) case) case) case) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764----2026 2026 2026 2026 Raj Singh @ Raja Versus State of Haryana Decision Decision Decision Decision: : : : July 20 July 20 July 20 July 20, , , , 2026 2026 2026 2026 Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: July 20 July 20 July 20 July 20, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Lalit Kumar Narang, Advocate Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Mr. Harshit Jangra, Advocate for the complainant. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section regular bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No registered for the offences punishable under Section 191(3) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 238(b), 111(2)(b) & 126(2) , at Police Station Bhiwani City, District Bhiwani The gravamen of FIR in question alleged that on 11.04.2025, at about 11:30 A.M., he, along with Prashant and Sohan was proceeding on foot from their respective houses towards Dinod Road. Upon reaching near the street of Subhash Halwai in Brijvasi Colony, Pardeep @ Ainda, Gaurav @ Gaura, Sahil @ Kala, Beerpal, 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2026 2026 2026 2026 ….Petitioner …Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. , Advocate for the complainant. filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for in case bearing FIR No.145 dated ences punishable under Sections 109(1)/ 126/ s 25(1)(a) and 25(1-B)(a) of the (b) & 126(2) of the BNS, 2023 added , at Police Station Bhiwani City, District Bhiwani. FIR in question is that the injured, namely, on 11.04.2025, at about 11:30 A.M., he, along with was proceeding on foot from their respective houses towards Dinod Road. Upon reaching near the street of Subhash Halwai in ep @ Ainda, Gaurav @ Gaura, Sahil @ Kala, Beerpal, 1111 ….Petitioner …Respondent for dated s 109(1)/ 126/ of the of the BNS, 2023 added the injured, namely, on 11.04.2025, at about 11:30 A.M., he, along with was proceeding on foot from their respective houses towards Dinod Road. Upon reaching near the street of Subhash Halwai in ep @ Ainda, Gaurav @ Gaura, Sahil @ Kala, Beerpal, MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.20 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764----2026 2026 2026 2026 Rahul Nai, Vicky, Rajan, Monu @ Basandi, along with 5–6 other persons, suddenly arrived at the spot, wrongfully restrained them, and started pelting stones at them. It was further alleged that Sahil @ Kala fired a gunshot at the complainant with the intention to kill him, which struck his right leg. Gaurav @ Gaura also fired a shot from his pistol at Prashant with the intention to kill him, which hit Prashant on his right hand. The accused persons allegedly fired shots and pelted stones with the intention to cause their death. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2025. Learned counsel has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further urged that, assuming arguendo, the prosecution version is taken to be correct, no fire shot is attributed to the petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that as per FIR version, fire shot is attributed to the co-accused, namely, Sahil @ Kala and Gaurav @ Gaura. Learned counsel has submitted that co-accused, namely, Gaurav @ Gaura was found innocent by the police during the course of investigation, but has been subsequently summoned by the concerned trial Court by invoking powers under Section 319 of the Cr. P.C. (Section 358 of the BNS, 2023). Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody for more than 09 months. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated 16.07.2026, in the Court today, which is taken on record. 4.1. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the grant of petition in hand by arguing that there are serious allegations against the MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.20 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764----2026 2026 2026 2026 petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner along with his co- accused had come to kill the complainant and another person with criminal intention. Learned counsel has argued that specific/ clear role is attributed to the petitioner. Learned counsel has urged that, in case, the petitioner is released on regular bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice as also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. Learned counsel has further urged that the petitioner has criminal antecedents. On the strength of these submissions, dismissal of the petition in hand is entreated for. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 29.09.2025, whereinafter, the investigation was carried out and the challan qua the petitioner has been presented on 10.12.2025. Total 40 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which PW – Vinod (FIR-complainant) has been examined and thereafter, an application under Section 319 of Cr. P.C. (Section 358 of the BNS, 2023) was preferred. No other/ further witness has been examined subsequent thereto. It is not in dispute before this Court that the fire shot(s) in question has not been attributed to the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the complainant/ injured, after receiving requisite medical treatment, stands discharged long ago. The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall essentially be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.20 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764----2026 2026 2026 2026 6.1. As per custody certificate dated 16.07.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 09 months and 17 days. 6.2. Further, as per the said custody certificate, the petitioner is stated to be involved in other FIR(s). However, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, U.P. and another, U.P. and another, U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 477 477 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Akhilesh Akhilesh Akhilesh Singh v. State of H Singh v. State of H Singh v. State of H Singh v. State of Haryana aryana aryana aryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Balraj v. State of Balraj v. State of Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed allowed allowed allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.20 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 5555 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----36764 36764 36764 36764----2026 2026 2026 2026 (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July 20 July 20 July 20 July 20, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.20 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment