CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 1 218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.07.2026 ISMAIL ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Senior DAG, Haryana. Mr. Majlish Khan, Advocate for the complainant. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking grant of regular bail during the pendency of trial in criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 39 dated 12.03.2025, registered at Police Station Rozka Meo, District Nuh, under Sections 103(1), 190, 191(3), 115(2) 249(a), 238, 61(2), 3(5) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 302, 148, 149, 124, 212, 506, 120-B, and 34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860), and Sections 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. As per the prosecution, the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Mustak. It is alleged that on 08.03.2025, some of the accused persons had entered the house of Suban Khan and attacked him, whereupon the deceased and the complainant intervened and saved the life of KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 2 Suban Khan. Due to the said incident, enmity allegedly developed between the two groups. It is further alleged that on 11.03.2025, at about 5:30 PM, when the complainant and deceased Mehboob Khan came out of the mosque, they were attacked by the accused persons who were allegedly present outside the mosque. It is alleged that Shahid @ Mamrez, Tahir, Jahul, Zaheer Ali and Mohammad attacked them with sticks, while Haroon, Akbar and Akhtar were also present with them. The prosecution further alleges that when the complainant party tried to escape, Shamsher and the present petitioner raised a lalkara to not spare them. Thereafter, Jahul allegedly fired a gunshot from the roof, which narrowly missed Mehboob Khan, whereas Shahid @ Mamrez allegedly fired another shot which hit the deceased on his neck and proved fatal. It is further alleged that Shahid @ Mulla and Tahir also fired shots at the complainant party, which did not hit anyone, and subsequently Ijyaaz, Abrar and Tamkeen allegedly provided weapons to the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated due to previous village rivalry and family disputes. It is contended that the petitioner has been attributed no specific role in the occurrence except an allegation of raising a lalkara, and no injury or overt act has been attributed to him. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation has already been completed, the challan has been presented on 26.01.2026, charges have been framed on 24.02.2026, and none of the 37 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. The petitioner is in custody since 01.11.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time. 3.1 Learned counsel further argued that although 13 persons were initially named in the FIR, during investigation, several accused persons have KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 3 been found innocent and deleted from the array of accused, including persons to whom specific roles of causing firearm injuries, supplying weapons and causing injuries with iron rods were attributed. Learned counsel submits that this itself reflects exaggeration and false implication in the present case. 3.2 Learned counsel further submitted that several accused persons have been implicated only on account of previous enmity, and an earlier FIR under Sections relating to simple hurt was registered by the complainant party against the accused side, reflecting the background of rivalry between the parties. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has no criminal role in the actual occurrence, has clean antecedents, and deserves the concession of regular bail during the pendency of trial. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Senior DAG, Haryana, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Mazlish Khan, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 6. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail and submits that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, involving the murder of the deceased pursuant to a group assault arising out of previous enmity between the parties. Learned State counsel contends that the petitioner was part of the unlawful assembly and actively participated in the occurrence by raising a lalkara, thereby facilitating the attack by the co- accused. 7. Be that as it may, considering the custody period already undergone by the petitioner, i.e. since 01.11.2025, and the fact that the KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 4 investigation stands concluded, the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court, charges have been framed, and none of the 37 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date, it is evident that the trial is likely to take considerable time to reach its logical conclusion. Further, the petitioner has not been attributed any specific overt act or injury in the occurrence and the only allegation against him is that of raising a lalkara. It is also a matter of record that during investigation, certain accused persons, who were attributed specific roles of causing injuries and supplying weapons, have been found innocent and have been deleted from the array of accused. 8. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2018 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that grant of bail is the rule and refusal thereof is an exception, and that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is further submitted that the right to speedy trial forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same has been consistently recognised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including in Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another (SLO (Crl.) No. 8523/2024). In the present case, the trial is likely to consume considerable time before reaching its logical conclusion. In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial can be effectively safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 5 concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency. 2. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall attempt, directly or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. 3. The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. 4. The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the petitioner his permanent residential address as well as present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. 5. The petitioner shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 6. The petitioner shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-26400-2026 (O&M) 6 residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change. 7. The petitioner shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or his unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 09.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh