CRM-M-18646 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (212) UMED SINGH ALIAS MANSA STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. to the petitioner in case FIR No. 351(3), 74 and 79 of BNS and Section 8 of POCSO Act of POCSO Act and Section 65(2) of BNS added Police Station Asauda District Jhajjar. 2. conducted on the date the FIR was lodged, there were no allegations of penetrative sexual assault. The initial allegations were marks on the victim's cheeks. Subsequently, without any order or direction from the Court MLR was conducted to penetrativ -1- 18646-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH UMED SINGH ALIAS MANSA Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Akshita Chauhan, DAG, Haryana Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. ***** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 266 dated 30.09.2024 351(3), 74 and 79 of BNS and Section 8 of POCSO Act of POCSO Act and Section 65(2) of BNS added Police Station Asauda District Jhajjar. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the MLR conducted on the date the FIR was lodged, there were no allegations of penetrative sexual assault. The initial allegations were marks on the victim's cheeks. Subsequently, without any order or direction from the Court or any recorded justification for a re conducted on 01.10.2024, in which serious to penetrative sexual assault were levelled. Counsel further submitted that IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18646-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 14.05.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Akshita Chauhan, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. The present petition has been filed seeking grant of regular bail 30.09.2024, under Sections 115, 351(3), 74 and 79 of BNS and Section 8 of POCSO Act (Sections 6 and 10 of POCSO Act and Section 65(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the MLR conducted on the date the FIR was lodged, there were no allegations of penetrative sexual assault. The initial allegations were limited to certain marks on the victim's cheeks. Subsequently, without any order or direction or any recorded justification for a re-examination, a second .2024, in which serious allegations pertaining led. Counsel further submitted that 14.05.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondents The present petition has been filed seeking grant of regular bail 115, (Sections 6 and 10 , registered at Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the MLR conducted on the date the FIR was lodged, there were no allegations of limited to certain marks on the victim's cheeks. Subsequently, without any order or direction a second pertaining led. Counsel further submitted that MANJU 2026.05.14 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18646 the material witnesses have already been examined and that the petitioner a 52 years old man with clean antecedents, has been falsely implicated due to a land dispute between himself and the 3. certificate, which is taken on record, and opposed the grant of any concession to the petitioner. learned counsel for the years old and was repeatedly molested and harassed by the petitioner after being allured by him. However, the State could not deny that the material witnesses have been examined and that the petitioner has no prior crimin record. 4. petitioner is in with the fact that the purpose would be served by the petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. 5. petition stands allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail not required in any other case on furnishing bail bonds and heavy surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following conditions: i ii -2- 18646-2026 (O&M) the material witnesses have already been examined and that the petitioner old man with clean antecedents, has been falsely implicated due to a land dispute between himself and the victim's parents. Per contra, learned State counsel has filed a custody certificate, which is taken on record, and opposed the grant of any concession to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the learned counsel for the complainant, argued that the victim was only 11 years old and was repeatedly molested and harassed by the petitioner after being allured by him. However, the State could not deny that the material witnesses have been examined and that the petitioner has no prior crimin In light of the above and considering the fact that that the is in custody for the last 01 year 06 months and 03 with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. Accordingly, the petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition stands allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail not required in any other case on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following The petitioner shall declare his ordinary place of residence and the mobile number used by him. The petitioner will not switch off his mobile and in case of any the material witnesses have already been examined and that the petitioner is old man with clean antecedents, has been falsely implicated due victim's parents. , learned State counsel has filed a custody certificate, which is taken on record, and opposed the grant of any earned counsel for the State assisted by argued that the victim was only 11 years old and was repeatedly molested and harassed by the petitioner after being allured by him. However, the State could not deny that the material witnesses have been examined and that the petitioner has no prior criminal In light of the above and considering the fact that that the 01 year 06 months and 03 days, coupled trial is likely to take considerable time, no useful keeping the petitioner in custody. Accordingly, the petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition stands allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail if not required in any other case on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following his ordinary place of residence and the mobile number used by him. The petitioner will not switch off his mobile and in case of any is old man with clean antecedents, has been falsely implicated due , learned State counsel has filed a custody certificate, which is taken on record, and opposed the grant of any State assisted by argued that the victim was only 11 years old and was repeatedly molested and harassed by the petitioner after being allured by him. However, the State could not deny that the material al In light of the above and considering the fact that that the coupled trial is likely to take considerable time, no useful keeping the petitioner in custody. Accordingly, Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present if not required in any other case on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner shall, however, be released on the following his ordinary place of residence and The petitioner will not switch off his mobile and in case of any MANJU 2026.05.14 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18646 iii iv imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. 6. expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be considered as parity 7. involved in any such activity once again, the State complainant cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of conditions of bail. 8. May 14, 2026 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: -3- 18646-2026 (O&M) technical glitch, he has to give an alternate number, which will be available in his absence. The petitioner will mark his presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to mark his presence, he is permitted to make an application before the Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner will not leave the country wi permission of the Court, for which he will submit the copy of his passport also. However, in case the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he shall file an undertaking to the said effect before being released. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be considered as parity qua any other co-accused in any manner whatsoever. It is further made clear that, in case, the petitioner is found involved in any such activity once again, the State complainant is at liberty to promptly move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of conditions of bail. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. May 14, 2026 speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No technical glitch, he has to give an alternate number, which will e petitioner will mark his presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to mark his presence, he is permitted to make an application before the Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court, for which he will submit the copy of his passport also. However, in case the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he shall file an undertaking to the said abide by the terms and conditions as imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be accused in any manner whatsoever. It is further made clear that, in case, the petitioner is found involved in any such activity once again, the State as well as the is at liberty to promptly move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE technical glitch, he has to give an alternate number, which will e petitioner will mark his presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to mark his presence, he is permitted to make an application thout the prior permission of the Court, for which he will submit the copy of his passport also. However, in case the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he shall file an undertaking to the said abide by the terms and conditions as However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be It is further made clear that, in case, the petitioner is found as well as the is at liberty to promptly move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail detailing out the circumstances and violation of MANJU 2026.05.14 17:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document