CRM-M-40240-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No. 202 CRM-M- 40240-2025 Decided on:05.09.2025 Vishal alias Roda . . . Petitioner Versus State of Haryana . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Sandeep Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL) The petition has been filed under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.186 dated 20.09.2024, registered under Sections 3(5), 109(1) BNS and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 (Section 61 BNS and Sections 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, 1959 added later on) at Police Station Raipur Rani, District Panchkula. 2. As per the allegations in the FIR, one Goldy received gunshot injury in chest, statedly given by co-accused Dhruv Garg. Another co-accused Gursewak is accused of causing injuries to complainant Dinesh alias D. K. on finger. The third accused Akshit statedly waited for other accused on his bike. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has done recce of the area and helped the co-accused to execute the plan to shoot at the complainant and his accomplices. MEHAK HURIA 2025.09.05 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CRM-M-40240-2025 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no direct attribution to the petitioner and he has been accused of conspiring with the co- accused, but there is no material to connect him with the offences alleged. Besides, the trial is not progressing as none of the fifty-two prosecution witnesses has been examined, and he is in custody for a long time. 4. Learned State counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody since 27.09.2024. He also contends that charges have been framed on 18.02.2025, and the trial will commence soon. 5. Heard. 6. It is apparent that the petitioner has not been attributed any gun shot injuries, his complicity in the case is a matter of trial which will take some time to conclude as none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. The investigation is already over and charges have been framed, therefore, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in the custody any longer. 7. Accordingly, petition is allowed, and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 05.09.2025 JUDGE Mehak Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2025.09.05 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment