CRM-M-38509-2026 1 227 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38509-2026 Date of Decision: 22.07.2026 JOGA SINGH ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Satbir Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana. 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 the concession of regular bail in FIR No. 261 dated 21.05.2023, initially registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, with Sections 302 and 325 IPC added subsequently (corresponding to Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 333 and 351(2)/(3), with Sections 103(1) and 117(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 added subsequently), at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa, Haryana (Annexure P-1). 2. As per the prosecution case, the present FIR was registered on 21.05.2023 on the statement of the complainant alleging that a group of persons, armed with weapons, trespassed into the complainant's premises, assaulted the complainant party and caused multiple injuries. Initially, the FIR was registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and during the course of investigation, Sections 302 and 325 IPC were added on account of the injuries sustained by the victims. It is further the KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-38509-2026 2 case of the prosecution that the present petitioner was not named in the FIR. However, during the course of investigation, co-accused Alisher allegedly disclosed the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence. On the basis of the said disclosure statement and the material collected during investigation, the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case and was arrested on 16.12.2025. After completion of investigation qua the petitioner, the challan was presented before the learned Trial Court on 06.02.2026, where the case is presently pending for trial. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and was not named in the FIR. It is contended that specific allegations and overt acts have been attributed to the persons named in the FIR, whereas no role or injury has been attributed to the present petitioner. It is argued that the petitioner has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement allegedly made by co-accused Alisher and there is no independent, cogent or legally admissible material connecting him with the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner or at his instance pursuant to the said disclosure statement. 3.1 Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused, at whose instance the petitioner was nominated, namely Alisher, has already been granted the concession of regular bail. It is also submitted that all the other co- accused, including those specifically named in the FIR and against whom a more specific role has been attributed, have also been granted the concession of regular bail either by this Court or by the learned Trial Court. Thus, the petitioner claims parity with the said co-accused. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-38509-2026 3 3.2 It is further submitted that the petitioner has remained in custody since 16.12.2025. The investigation qua the petitioner stands concluded and the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court on 06.02.2026. Therefore, the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents, is not involved in any other criminal case, has deep roots in society and undertakes to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate dated 20.07.2026, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has already undergone a total custody period of 07 months and 05 days. 6. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail and submits that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, as the offences include Section 302 IPC. It is contended that though the petitioner was not named in the FIR, his involvement surfaced during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Alisher and the material collected during investigation. It is submitted that sufficient material has been collected against the petitioner to present the challan before the learned Trial Court. 7. Be that as it may, considering the custody period already undergone by the petitioner, who has remained in custody since 16.12.2025, and the fact that the investigation already stands concluded, the challan has KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-38509-2026 4 been presented before the learned Trial Court and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation, this Court finds that further detention of the petitioner is not warranted. It is also noteworthy that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and has been implicated during the course of investigation solely on the basis of the disclosure statement allegedly made by co-accused Alisher. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he has been arrested on account of mistaken identity, inasmuch as the disclosure statement refers to one Gursewak Singh @ Joga Singh, whereas the petitioner is not known by the name Gursewak Singh and is known only as Joga Singh. The correctness of the said contention, as well as the evidentiary value of the disclosure statement and the identity of the person referred to therein, are matters which can only be examined during the course of trial. It is further relevant to note that the co-accused Alisher, on whose disclosure statement the petitioner has been nominated, has already been granted the concession of regular bail, and the other co-accused have also been enlarged on bail. In these circumstances, and considering that the trial is likely to take considerable time to reach its logical conclusion, the continued incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. 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 KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-38509-2026 5 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 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 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 KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-38509-2026 6 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 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 22.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh