203 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.42549 of 2026 Date of Decision:- 07.08.2026 Gurmeet @ Meet …..Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Ashutosh Verma, Advocate for Mr. Randeep S. Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, Sr. DAG, 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.343 dated 27.10.2025 registered under Sections 110, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 190, 191(3), 351(3) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNS’), at Police Station City Thanesar, District Kurukshetra. 2. Custody certificate dated 05.08.2026 filed in Court today, is taken on record. 3. On the statement of one Vikas Kumar, the FIR in question was registered. As per the allegations, on 25.10.2025, the said Vikas Kumar YAG DUTT 2026.08.07 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.42549 of 2026 -2- was attacked by 5/6 unknown persons with sticks as a result of which, he suffered grievous injuries in the form of fractures on his arms. The complainant named Sachin Gujjar and Abhishek Kumar. The petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of other co-accused. The petitioner was arrested on 30.10.2025 and is in custody since then. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that though the injuries suffered by the complainant were grievous, they were in the form of fractures which would, at best, attract Section 325 IPC, which is a bailable offence. He submits that Section 308 IPC was added only to make the matter more serious. Learned counsel submits that there is also a delay of 2 days in lodging the FIR, which shows that the allegations were levelled after due deliberations. Learned counsel submits that investigation stands completed; the final report stands submitted; charges have been framed but none of the 15 prosecution witnesses has been examined as of now. He submits that in so far as the complainant is concerned, it has been reported that he lives in Canada. Learned counsel submits that under the circumstances there are no chances of the complainant also being examined in the near future. Still further, learned counsel contends that co-accused namely Abhishek has been granted regular bail vide order dated 24.04.2026 passed by a coordinate Bench in CRM-M No.1837 of 2026 and co-accused Sandeep and Dharampal and co-accused Sachin Kumar have been granted regular bail vide order dated 03.07.2026 passed by this Court in CRM-M YAG DUTT 2026.08.07 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.42549 of 2026 -3- No.32619 of 2026 and order dated 27.07.2026 passed in CRM-M No.20936 of 2026 respectively. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.10.2025 and the trial will take a sufficiently long time and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail petition stating that allegations against the petitioner are very serious and in case he is released on bail, he may try to threaten and influence the witnesses and may also abscond as he is involved in many other cases. 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. No doubt, the complainant suffered 9 injuries out of which, two were fractures on account of he having been attacked by a group of persons. The petitioner was named in a disclosure statement. He is in custody since 30.10.2025. As to whether it would be a case of an attempt to culpable homicide not amounting to murder would be determined when the trial concludes. The complainant is stated to be settled in Canada. His examination in the near future is also, therefore, not certain. He is not appearing before the trial Court to depose. In the considered opinion of this Court, since no witness out of 15 has been examined as of now, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. Still further, co-accused namely Abhishek has been granted regular bail vide order dated 24.04.2026 passed by a coordinate Bench in CRM-M No.1837 of 2026 and co-accused Sandeep and Dharampal and co-accused YAG DUTT 2026.08.07 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.42549 of 2026 -4- Sachin Kumar have been granted regular bail vide order dated 03.07.2026 passed by this Court in CRM-M No.32619 of 2026 and order dated 27.07.2026 passed in CRM-M No.20936 of 2026 respectively. The case of the petitioner is at par with the said accused. 8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, 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 on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) August 07, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.08.07 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.