CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222 CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Ashok Kumar ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gaurav, Advocate and Mr. Love Bishnoi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. Mr. Pradeep Virk, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition as filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.10 dated 05.02.2024 registered under Sections 302, 452, 506, 34, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Khanauri, District Sangrur. The previous MANJU 2026.07.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 -2- petition bearing CRM-M-17030-2025 as filed by him, has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 11.02.2026. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement recorded by the complainant Dhanraj alleging therein that in the noon of 05.02.2024, his younger brother Naresh was present in the village when someone called him at his house. When Naresh Kumar reached near the gate of his house, he found the petitioner to be present there along with the co-accused all of whom were armed with weapons. They opened an assault upon his brother and started extending beatings to him. His brother rushed inside his house but they entered therein and started striking blows with wooden sticks. The family members of Naresh Kumar who were present there, tried to save the victim but in vein. After causing injuries to him, they fled away. The victim was rushed to hospital but had succumbed to his injuries. 3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on 29.03.2024. He suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime and got recovered one wooden stick. Some of the persons named in the FIR were found to be innocent. Other co-accused were also arrested. Investigation now stands completed. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. No specific overt act, weapon or MANJU 2026.07.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 -3- injury has been attributed to him. The falsity of the version in the FIR stands established from the fact that several persons named therein have been found to be innocent and were exonerated. The cause of death of the victim has not been ascertained so far. Infact, the victim had died due to heart failure. Even the complainant while appearing as a witness has not attributed any specific role to the petitioner. He is in custody since 29.03.2024. The chances of conclusion of trial in near future are bleak as witnesses are yet to be examined. The co-accused Parveen whose case was on similar footing has been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he deserves to be extended the same benefit. His prolonged incarceration amounts to infringement of his right to guarantee as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India. His antecedents are clean. The co- accused Parveen whose case is on similar footing has been extended benefit of bail. The principle of parity weighs in favour of the petitioner. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. His presence at the spot stands fully established. The victim was beaten with sticks and by giving kicks and fist blows by the petitioner and the co-accused. It is argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail. MANJU 2026.07.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 -4- 6. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have formed membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused and in prosecution of common object thereof, is further alleged to have assaulted the victim resulting into his death. No specific overt act has been attributed to him and he has been linked with the subject offences with the aid of Section 149 of IPC. It is well settled proposition of law that in cases of group violence, individual roles must be specifically established and mere presence at the scene of crime cannot impute the same level of culpability to all the accused. There are no chance of conclusion of trial in near future as only 02 out of 32 prosecution witnesses have been examined. The petitioner has been in incarceration for a period of over 2 years and 3 months. It is well settled proposition of law that incarceration for an indefinite period amounts to infringement of right of an accused to life and liberty. It has also been held that every day spent in custody can provide a new cause of action for filing a bail application under certain circumstances. This principle is a part of the broader approach emphasizing that law prefers bail over jail, aiming to balance the rights of the accused with the requirements of the criminal justice system. There is nothing on record to show that delay in conclusion of trial is attributable to the petitioner in any manner whatsoever. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made MANJU 2026.07.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.25859 of 2026 -5- out a case for release on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. 8. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 27.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh