1 CRM-M-33927-2026 (O&M) 232 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33927-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.07.2026 SITENDER …Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA …Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal Present: Mr. Ketan Antil, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Bharti, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. *** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 370 dated 17.12.2025 under Sections 115, 117(2), 126, 190, 191(3), 232(1), 324(4), 351(3), 61(2) and 111(2)(a) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station, Civil Line, District Sonipat, Haryana. Offence under Sections 117(2) and 112(2) BNS was added in the FIR during investigation. This is the first petition for regular bail. 2. Allegations qua the present petition are that on 17.12.2025, when the complainant was going to the Court to depose against the co- accused namely Ankit, he was stopped and beaten up by approximately 5/6 persons and was threatened not to depose against the said co-accused namely Ankit, who is facing trial. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR. His name figured in the disclosure statement of co- accused. No recovery was effected from him. Further, that petitioner was in custody since 15.02.2026. Co-accused namely Siddharth @ Siddhu, similarly placed, had already been allowed regular bail by this Court vide AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.07 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CRM-M-33927-2026 (O&M) order dated 27.05.2026. Investigation of the case was complete and challan was presented. Petitioner, who has clean antecedents, deserved to be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail arguing that location of mobile phone of the petitioner was traced to be on the spot of occurrence, at the time of commission of offence and his involvement was clearly made out. His case was, therefore, distinguishable from that of co-accused Siddharth @ Siddhu. 5. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. He has been nominated as accused on disclosure statement of co-accused. Co-accused Siddharth @ Siddhu, similarly placed, has since been allowed regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.05.2026, passed in CRM-M-29508-2026. Petitioner is in custody w.e.f. 15.02.2026 i.e. for the last 04 months and 19 days. Investigation stands completed and challan has been presented in the Court of learned jurisdictional Magistrate. Mere involvement in one other case, is not sufficient reason to refuse bail. As such, petitioner is entitled for grant of regular bail on the ground parity. Petition is allowed. Without a comment on merits of the case, petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate 6. Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 06.07.2026 Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.07 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document