CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) -:1:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (213) CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:27.07.2026 RISHI KUMAR @ RISHI @ MONU … Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. -.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) 1. The present petition has been instituted 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 (corresponding to Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 333 and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023). Subsequently, Sections 302, 201 and 325 IPC (corresponding to Sections 103, 238 and 117(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) were added. The FIR was registered at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa, Haryana (Annexure P-1). 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case originates from the statement of the complainant, Pala Ram alias Pola, who alleged that on the GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) -:2:- night of 16.05.2023, several accused persons, armed with sticks, iron rods and other weapons, assaulted Ram Sharan, who initially managed to escape into his house but was allegedly followed and brutally assaulted therein. It is alleged that one of the assailants inflicted a blow with an iron toki on the head of Ram Sharan, while the remaining accused also caused injuries with their respective weapons. Thereafter, when the complainant and his family members attempted to arrange medical assistance for the injured, another group of accused persons allegedly returned to the spot, trespassed into the house, assaulted the complainant and Mansa Ram, and extended threats of dire consequences. All the injured were thereafter shifted to the hospital. Subsequently, on 23.05.2023, injured Mansa Ram succumbed to the injuries sustained in the occurrence. Consequently, the present FIR came to be registered and investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 15.12.2025, and a Swift car bearing registration No. HR24AF-8190, allegedly used in the commission of the offence, was recovered at his instance. 3. The custody certificate produced by the learned State counsel is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. 3.1. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail, contending that, having regard to the nature, gravity and seriousness of the allegations, coupled with the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. It is, accordingly, prayed that the present petition, being devoid of merit, be dismissed. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) -:3:- 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have meticulously perused the paper book and the material available on record with their able assistance. 5. It is an admitted position that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, nor has any specific overt act been attributed to him in the prosecution version. The allegation against the petitioner is confined to the assertion that he acted as the driver of the vehicle allegedly hired by co- accused. Co-accused namely Ganesh has already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 21.08.2024 passed in CRM-M-17020- 2024. Similarly, co-accused Kuldeep @ Babbal and Happy have also been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court. The petitioner, therefore, claims the benefit of parity, and no distinguishing circumstance has been pointed out by the learned State counsel so as to deny him the same relief. 5.1. It is further not in dispute that the petitioner has remained in judicial custody since 15.12.2025. The trial is progressing at a slow pace and is not likely to conclude in the near future. Continued incarceration of the petitioner for an indefinite period would, therefore, impinge upon his fundamental right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by prolonging his detention pending trial. 5.2. Consequently, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) -:4:- Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- i. The petitioner(s) 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. ii. The petitioner(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall the petitioner(s), directly or indirectly, attempt to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. iii. The petitioner(s) shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event any of the petitioner(s) is in possession of a passport, the particulars thereof shall be furnished before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. iv. Before accepting the bail and surety bonds, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/C.J.M. concerned shall obtain from the petitioner(s) the permanent residential address as well as the present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours of the acceptance of the bail bonds and place a verification report on record. In the event any 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. v. The petitioner(s) 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, the Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22484-2026 (O&M) -:5:- 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 the concession of bail in accordance with law. vi. The petitioner(s) 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 of such change. vii. The petitioner(s) 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 personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. The petitioner(s) shall not absent from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions or 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 bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest. 6. In view of the final adjudication of the principal matter, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising out of or ancillary to the present proceedings shall also stand disposed of accordingly. No separate or further orders are called for in respect of such applications, the same having been rendered infructuous in consequence of the present adjudication. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 27.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document