CRM-M-70273-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CRM-M-70273-2025 Date of decision: 2nd September, 2026 Suresh @ Mota ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Devender Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Apoorv Garg, Addl. A.G, Haryana. *** MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL):- The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 155 dated 02.05.2023 registered under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC (section 201 and 506 of IPC added later on) at Police Station Sector 5, Gurugram. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint submitted by the complainant Jeetan Kumar, alleging that his cousin namely Rajender used to ply a cycle rickshaw in Gurugram and was residing in a rented accommodation owned by the present petitioner. In the morning of 02.05.2023, upon receipt of an information regarding the death of Rajender, the complainant came to Gurugram and on making inquiries from PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.09.03 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-70273-2025 -2- the two other tenants of the same premises, namely Arjun and Vinod, who were hailing from the native village of the complainant, it was revealed that an altercation had taken place between the petitioner and the deceased on the previous night. Suspecting that the petitioner had a hand in the death of the deceased, the complainant prayed for taking action in the matter. 3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. Post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased was conducted, as per which the cause of death was opined to be asphyxia consequent upon ante-mortem ligature strangulation. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested. On interrogation, he suffered a disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime. Investigation now stands concluded. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no eyewitness to the murder of the deceased. The case rests upon suspicion and circumstantial evidence and there is no circumstance connecting the petitioner with the commission of the crime. The disclosure statement allegedly suffered by him cannot be considered to be legally admissible in evidence. Two eyewitnesses namely Arjun and Vinod, have not supported the prosecution version He has been in custody for a period of over 03 years. The trial will take considerable time to conclude, as only 13 out of 27 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. His antecedents are clean. His further incarceration would militate against his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.09.03 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-70273-2025 -3- and his continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, argued that the present petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that PW-5 Ashish, who was also an eyewitness to the factum of the petitioner’s extending beatings to the deceased on the fateful night, has fully supported the prosecution version. The trial is proceeding at a proper pace. The allegations against the petitioner are quite serious in nature. It is, therefore, argued that the petitioner does not deserve to be extended the benefit of bail. 6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have caused the homicidal death of the deceased by strangulating him with the help of a piece of cloth (gamcha). The dead body of the deceased was recovered from the premises owned by the petitioner. No doubt, two of the material witnesses, namely Arjun and Vinod, have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution version, but learned counsel for the State has placed on record a copy of the testimony of PW-5 Ashish, which reveals that on the fateful night, an altercation had taken place between the petitioner, who was under the influence of liquor and the deceased, and the petitioner had assaulted the deceased. The circumstances prima facie suggest complicity of the petitioner in crime. It is well-settled proposition of law that grant of bail is a discretionary relief to be granted or denied based on specific facts and circumstance of each case and there cannot be any exhaustive parameters set out for considering the application for grant of bail. The factors such as nature of accusations, severity PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.09.03 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-70273-2025 -4- of punishment if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. That apart, reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence or threatening the complainant is also to be weighed. Frivolity of prosecution should always be considered, and it is only the element of genuineness that has to be considered in the matter of grant of bail. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made in Parmod Kumar Saxena Vs. UOI, 2008(63) ACC (SC), Chenna Boyanna Krishna Yadav Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC, 242 and State through CBI Vs. Amaramani Tripathi, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 280(SC). In light of the foregoing legal principles, this Court finds no compelling ground to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 8. It is clarified that any observation made in this order is only for deciding this petition and shall not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on merits. 9. Since the main petition has already been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. [MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE 2nd September, 2026 Parveen Sharma 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.09.03 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document