216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45552-2025 Date of decision: 26.08.2025 ANKUSH ...Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present: Mr. Raghav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, DAG, Haryana. ***** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner is praying for regular bail in case FIR No.03, dated 02.01.2025, registered at Police Station City Thanesar, Kurukshetra, under Sections 109(1), 115, 351(2) of BNS, 2023 and (Section 54 of Arms Act added later on). 2. The present case was registered on the basis of statement given to the police by Dilbag Singh with the allegations that on 02.01.2025, he along with his friend Deepak was reversing his car after closing the office when one boy and a girl came on a motorcycle and stopped the motorcycle in front of their car, on which Deepak asked him to remove the motorcycle but they started arguing. When he was getting out of the car, the boy started attacking Deepak with a knife and they snatched knife from him and many people assembled at the spot. Thereafter, he took Priyanka Thakur 2025.08.27 19:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Deepak to a nearby Hospital and he suspected that one Dharmender @ Deep has got this assault committed upon them. Petitioner was arrested on 02.01.2025 and after completion of investigation, challan has been presented for trial. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel and have gone through the material collected by the police during investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Infact, he was beaten by the opposite party and knife allegedly used by him is having blade of 8.5cm and the injury in the abdomen of victim is 3 cm muscle deep which cannot be termed as dangerous to life. Learned counsel next contended that trial is likely to take sufficiently long time to conclude and further detention of the petitioner is not required and he may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Vijay Kumar has opposed the bail and argued that the petitioner has committed heinous offence. Trial is at its initial stage and and in case he is released on bail, he will try to intimidate the witnesses. As such, he does not deserve the concession of bail. 6. As to whether the injury will fall within the definition of “dangerous to life” or not shall be a moot question during the trial as injury is only 3cm muscle deep. Petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2025 and challan has already been presented after completion of investigation. Trial is likely to take sufficiently long time to conclude and no useful purpose will thus be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. Priyanka Thakur 2025.08.27 19:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 7. Having regard to the aforesaid factual position, but without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions. (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) 26.08.2025 JUDGE Priyanka Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No Priyanka Thakur 2025.08.27 19:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document