CRM-M-48648-2026 1 229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-48648-2026 Date of Decision: 03.09.2026 LOVEKESH ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Sauhard Singh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.147 dated 14.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 103(2), 115, 190, 191(2), 351(3) BNS (Sections 212 and 238 BNS added later on) (corresponding to Sections 302, 323, 149, 147, 506 of IPC and Sections 177 and 201 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sonipat, Sadar, District Sonipat, Haryana. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the complainant, namely Sunita, has been examined as PW-2, and the injured witness, namely Deepak, has been examined as PW-1. None of them have supported the case of the prosecution. As the petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025 but only 03 of the 17 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon, and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail particularly when a co-accused, namely Parveen, has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 27.02.2026 though on different grounds. KUSUM 2026.09.03 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh CRM-M-48648-2026 2 3. The learned counsel for the State has not disputed the factual assertions that two material witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have turned hostile, that the petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025, that only 03 of the 17 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and that a co-accused, namely Parveen, has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 27.02.2026. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. Admittedly, two material witnesses have turned hostile. Whether the remaining evidence available against the petitioner and his co-accused is sufficient to affix their liability shall be examined during the course of the trial. The petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025, that only 03 of the 17 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioners is not required. 6. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Lovekesh S/o Pritpal is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 03.09.2026 kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No KUSUM 2026.09.03 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh