CRM-M-21442-2026 -1- (224) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21442-2026 Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 SANDEEP ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Yajat Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL) The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.404 dated 25.11.2024 registered under Sections 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109(1), 351(3) (Sections 148, 149, 323, 307, 506 IPC) and Sections 42 of Prisons Act at Police Station Baldev Nagar, District Ambala. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The complainant/Pardeep has received only one simple injury on the head which has been attributed to multiple accused including the petitioner. As the petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2024 but only 05 of the 25 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail. JITESH LAL 2026.07.15 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21442-2026 -2- 3. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the petitioner along with his co-accused assaulted the complainant. A Kada has been recovered from him. He is an accused in six other cases. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail. She, however, concedes that the injury received by the complainant/Pardeep is simple in nature and that the petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2024 but only 05 of the 25 of the prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is a first-time offender, in custody since 25.11.2024 but only 05 of the 25 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 6. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Sandeep S/o Bhartu Ram is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 7. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 15.07.2026 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL 2026.07.15 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document