CRM-M-35810-2026 -1- 239 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35810-2026 Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 Gulfam …Petitioner vs. State of Haryana …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate and Mr. A.V.S. Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Sr. DAG, Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the third petition under Section 483 of BNSS (439 of the Cr.P.C.) with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No. 48 dated 02.04.2025 registered under Section 25 of Arms Act and Sections 115, 118(1), 126, 190, 191(3), 324(5) and 351(2), (Sections 109(1), 117(2) and 118(2) added later on) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [erstwhile Sections 323, 324, 341, 149, 148, 427, 506, 307, 325, 326 of Indian Penal Code, 1860] at Police Station Raipur Rani, District Panchkula. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the present case, the petitioner has been wrongly involved by the complainant. After completion of investigation, the final report of investigation has been presented on 23.09.2025 and since then, no witness has been examined so far. He further contends that even though, eight more cases were ordered to be registered against the petitioner, but he is on bail in most of the cases. He further submits HEMLATA 2026.07.17 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35810-2026 -2- that his similarly placed co-accused, namely, Kasim Ali has already been granted the concession of bail by the trial Court, vide order dated 26.08.2025 (Annexure P-6). 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner was carrying a sharp edged weapon and had caused injuries to the complainant. Even the car of the complainant was damaged by the petitioner and his co-accused and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than one year. The injured in the present case has been discharged from the hospital and is hale and hearty. The prosecution has not been able to examine even a single witness so far and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority. HEMLATA 2026.07.17 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35810-2026 -3- (ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned. (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case he is not holder of the same, he shall swear an affidavit to that effect. (v) The petitioner shall also file his affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning his ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by him during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned Trial Court. (vi) In case, the petitioner involves in any other criminal activity, during the pendency of the trial, it shall be viewed seriously. (vii) The concerned Court may insist on two heavy local sureties and may also impose any other condition, in accordance with law, while accepting the bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 15.07.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.07.17 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document