CRM-M No.14526 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 209 CRM-M No.14526 of 2026 Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Arbaj ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Balraj Gujjar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. Mr. Soeb Khan, Advocate, for the victim. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 148 dated 01.07.2025 registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 3(5) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Pinangwan, District Nuh. MANJU 2026.07.27 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.14526 of 2026 -2- 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of written complaint submitted by the complainant Mubeen alleging that the petitioner and the co-accused were having a plot which was existing next to the plot owned by the complainant. A dispute was going on between the members of the accused party and the family of the complainant about these plots and an FIR bearing No. 73 had been lodged at Pinangwa, Police Station. On 30.06.2025, the accused persons had been raising some construction on their plot. They had assaulted Rehmat, father of the complainant and had proclaimed that the complainant could do whatever he wanted to do. A Panchayat meeting was convened on 01.07.2025. The petitioner by forming membership of an unlawful assembly with the co-accused encircled the father of the complainant and caused injuries to him with the help of lathees, dandas and iron rods. He was left in an injured condition. Sometime thereafter, they also opened an attack upon the complainant, his brother Dilshad and Waheed. The petitioner and Ikram fired shots with firearm thereby causing injuries to Dilshad and Waheed and while extending threats to kill the family of the complainant, they managed to flee. The injured were rushed to the hospital and were provided treatment. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on 03.07.2025. The co-accused have also been arrested. Investigation now stands completed and the challan has been filed. MANJU 2026.07.27 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.14526 of 2026 -3- 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to election rivalry. The prosecution version is highly improbable and unbelievable who was named as co-accused and against whom allegations of firing shot by using a firearm were raised has been found to be innocent thereby casting a serious doubt over the verasity of the story of the complainant. The co- accused Hanif and Sarif have been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the same benefit. He is in custody since 03.07.2025. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as none out of 21 prosecution witnesses has been examined. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, thus, argued that he deserves to be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the victim has 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. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have caused injuries to the victims. The specific injury as attributed to him is a firearm injury on the person of Dilshad and Waheed. The allegations make out a prima facie case for commission of the subject offences as against the petitioner, however, he is in custody since 03.07.2025. He is MANJU 2026.07.27 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.14526 of 2026 -4- not required for further investigation. Trial would obviously take time to conclude since no prosecution witness has been examined so far. The well settled proposition of law is that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. Pre trial incarceration of an accused should not be a replica of post conviction sentencing. The detention prior to trial should not become punitive. Taking into consideration the above-mentioned facts, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds of two sureties to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. 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 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh