IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222 CRM-M-36959-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 RAJ KUMAR ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA .…Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Deepinder Singh, Senior Advocate Mr. Mayank Sampal, Advocate and Mr. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the ‘BNSS’) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.72 dated 18.03.2021 registered under Sections 148, 149, 302, 323, 506 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (offence under Sections 325, 326 and 34 of IPC added and offence under Section 148 and 149 of IPC deleted subsequently) at Police Station Chand Hut, District Palwal (Haryana). 2. On a complaint submitted by one Lalit, the FIR in question was registered, the contents of which are as under:- “To The S.H.O. Police Station Chandhut. Subject: Legal action against 1. Rajkumar, 2.Tej Singh 3. Jawahar sons of Radhe Lal, 4. Vikas son Jawahar 5. Trivoni wife Jawahar, 6. Jyoti wife of Tej Singh All residents of Ganniki. Sir, I, Lalit son of Kehar Singh am permanent resident of village Ganniki. Today at about 7.30 PM in the evening I was present at my house, when I heard a noise from outside, after hearing the MANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36959-2026 (O&M) -2- noise I went outside in the Chowk and saw that Rajkumar had a country-made weapon in his hand, Tej Singh had an axe/kulhari in his hand, Vikas had Farsha in his hand, Jawahar had a danda in his hand, Trivoni had an axe/kulhari in her hand and Jyoti had a stick in his hand, all these were in the Chownk hurling abuses to my father Kehar Singh and my brother Sahil, I told them from a distance not to abuse, then Rajkumar said kill them and in the meantime Rajkumar shot my father directly in the chest with his country made pistol carried in his hand, due to which my father fell on the spot and Rajkumar fired the second bullet directly towards me with an intention to kill me, however I escaped and then Vikas gave Farsha blow on the head of my father lying on the ground, Tej Singh hit kulhari blow directly to the shoulder of my father, Jawahar and Jyoti gave sticks blow to my father. On hearing this noise, my sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Manisha also reached on the spot and along with her my mother Kanchan also reached to the spot and they also saw this incident with their own eyes. When my brother Sahil ran to save father, then Tejsingh, Vikas, Jawahar, Trivoni, and Jyoti gave many injuries to my brother Sahil with the weapons carried in their hands, when my Bhabhi Manisha ran in order to save Sahil, then Trivoni gave kulhari blow carried in her hand to my Bhabhi directly on her hand, due to fear my mother was hiding with me. My father has died due to the injuries inflicted on him by the accused and due to serious condition of my brother Sahil he has been referred from Government Hospital Palwal to higher Center. Action be taken against the accused. My Bhabhi Manisha also received first aid in government hospital Palwal. Action be taken. Accused Rajkumar openly threatened that if anybody gave witness against us then we will kill them. Sd/- Lalit Applicant Lalit son of Kehar Singh resident of Ganniki Mob. (Milk) 9850202449 dated 17.03.21.” 3. The petitioner was arrested on 08.03.2022 and is in custody since then. MANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36959-2026 (O&M) -3- 4. Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner has strenuously urged that despite the petitioner being in custody for 4 years and 4 months now, trial has not concluded, thereby seriously prejudicing the right of the petitioner to a speedy trial. He submits that despite directions having been given by a Co-ordinate Bench one year back to decide the trial within a period of 4 months, the same has still not been decided. He further submits that in fact even the weapon of the alleged offence was not initially sent to the FSL for a period of 4 years and has only recently been sent after taking permission from the Court. He submits that the petitioner cannot be made to wait endlessly for the conclusion of the trial. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application, stating that the allegations are extremely serious as the petitioner is alleged to have shot one Kehar Singh, father of the complainant, from point blank range with a country-made pistol which along with cartridges was recovered from him. Learned State counsel further submits that even as per the report of the FSL, the bullet recovered from the body of the deceased matches with the pistol recovered from the petitioner. She submits that under the circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. 6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the issue in hand. 7. No doubt, the petitioner is in custody since 08.03.2022. 4 years and 4 months have gone by. The trial has still not concluded. Unfortunately, even the weapon of offence has been sent to FSL only recently. However, the allegation against the petitioner is of the petitioner having shot dead one Kehar Singh from point blank range with a country made pistol which is alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner. The eye witness i.e. son of the deceased has already deposed in the trial. Directions have already been issued by a Co-ordinate Bench for time bound disposal of the trial. This MANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36959-2026 (O&M) -4- Court has been informed that out of a total of 44 witnesses only one witness remains to be examined. Since directions have already been issued by a Co- ordinate Bench, this Court does not deem it appropriate to issue any further directions as the Court concerned is already bound by the directions issued by the Co-ordinate Bench. 8. However, keeping in view the gravity of the allegations and the nature of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, this Court does not find it to be a case where the petitioner should be released on regular bail even despite the long incarceration. 9. That being so, the petition is found to be devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 11. However, nothing stated herein above shall be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE July 23, 2026 Mani Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document