CRM-M-29674-2026 (O&M) 1- 222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No. Particulars 1. The date when the judgment is reserved 24.08.2026 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 26.08.2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website 26.08.2026 4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced or full judgment is pronounced Full 5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full judgment and reasons thereof Not applicable CRM-M-29674-2026 (O&M) DHARMENDER ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Satish Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, DAG, Haryana. *** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.87 dated 25.02.2024 under Sections 302, 364, 201, 120-B Indian Penal Code and Sections 25, 54, 59 Indian Arms Act, Police Station Chandhut, District Palwal. This is the second petition for regular bail. First petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 17.03.2026. 2. FIR was registered on 25.02.2024 on complaint of Surender son of Murari Lal regarding disappearance of his younger brother Rampal on 24.02.2024. During investigation, call detail records of missing Rampal SUMIT SINGLA 2026.08.26 17:36 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-29674-2026 (O&M) -2- were obtained and analysed. On 28.02.2024, on supplementary statement of complainant, Dharmender (petitioner), Pankaj son of Mahesh, Pawan son of Mahesh and Deepika wife of Dharmender were joined as accused, offences under Sections 364 and 120-B IPC were added, deleting Section 346 IPC. On 29.02.2024, accused Pawan was arrested and a black Oppo mobile phone was recovered from his possession. He suffered disclosure statement that Rampal was shot dead by his brother-in-law Dharmender and the pistol used by Dharmender in the crime was thrown in Agra canal which he later got recovered on 03.03.2024. On 01.03.2024, accused Dharmender was arrested. On 04.03.2024, Alto car bearing registration No. HR-30Z-4925 used in the offence was recovered from possession of the petitioner. During investigation, the police found that petitioner washed bloodstains from the vehicle used in the commission of offence, burnt the seat covers of the vehicle and items on which blood of Rampal fell and replaced the window glasses, with intention to destroy evidence. Offences under Section 302 and 201 IPC were added. On 16.03.2024, an unidentified decomposed body was recovered from Agra canal. Postmortem examination was done, DNA samples were collected and sent to FSL. Subsequently, challan was presented on 24.05.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was behind bars for the last more than 2 years and 5 months. Co-accused Pawan had been allowed regular bail. The case was based on circumstantial evidence. DNA report was not incriminating. As per case setup, deceased Rampal was shot dead by the petitioner with his pistol when he refused to execute agreement in favour of the petitioner. However, postmortem report revealed that the death was by drowning. He thus, prays for release of the SUMIT SINGLA 2026.08.26 17:36 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-29674-2026 (O&M) -3- petitioner on regular bail on the ground of prolonged incarceration. 4. Reply by way of affidavit of Anil Kumar, HPS, DSP, Crime, Palwal, District Palwal and custody certificate dated 23.08.2026 have been filed by State of Haryana, which are taken on record. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail arguing that petitioner’s name was revealed in the supplementary statement of complainant. His role disclosed by co-accused was that he murdered the deceased with his pistol and transported the dead body in his vehicle to Agra canal bridge where it was thrown. Petitioner tried to destroy evidence by washing away bloodstains in the car and by burning the seat covers of the vehicle. Pistol used by the petitioner in the commission of offence was recovered from co-accused. She thus, prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is prosecution case that deceased was shot dead by the petitioner with his pistol which was subsequently recovered from co-accused. As per postmortem examination report, cause of death is “asphyxia as a result of drowning”. Concededly, DNA report is not incriminating. Out of 26 witnesses, only 2 have been examined. Decision of the case by an early date, does not appear to be possible. 6. Speedy trial has now been recognised as a facet of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Prolonged custody of an accused and delay in trial entitles him to bail. Law in this regard has been settled by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in Sagar Ashok Satkar Versus The State of Maharashtra, Crl. Appeal No. 2870 of 2024 decided on 12.07.2024; Nilesh Vithoba Gadade Versus The State of Maharashtra and another, Crl. Appeal No.3040 of 2025 decided on 18.07.2025 and SUMIT SINGLA 2026.08.26 17:36 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-29674-2026 (O&M) -4- Balwinder Singh Versus State of Punjab and another Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 8523 of 2024 decided on 09.09.2024. 7. In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, material collected by the investigating agency against the petitioner and the period of incarceration undergone, but without commenting on merits of the case, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 26.08.2026 JUDGE Sumit Singla Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGLA 2026.08.26 17:36 I agree to specified portions of this document