CRM-M No.50595 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 ***** CRM-M No.50595 of 2026 Date of decision : 11.9.2026 Date of uploading : 11.9.2026 Chhotu Kumar and another ………….Petitioners Versus State of Haryana …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Sanjeev Majra, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Priyanka Sadar, Senior DAG, Haryana --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.437 dated 22.7.2024 under Sections 111(2)(b) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 25(6) of Arms Act, Section 12 of Passport Act (Sections 199, 336(2), 337, 61(2), 340 of BNS and Section 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 added later on), registered at Police Station Indri, District Karnal. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that petitioner no.1 is in custody since 4.4.2025 whereas petitioner no.2 is in custody since 18.4.2025. Learned counsel has further urged that the petitioners have been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further urged that the challan (upon culmination of investigation) already stands filed wherein total 32 prosecution witnesses have been ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50595 of 2026 -2- cited but the trial is yet to effectively begin as requisite sanction against co-accused Madan Lal has not been received. Learned counsel has further urged that the petitioners are not in a position to interfere with the prosecution evidence. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 3. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioners does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificates dated 10.9.2026 and 11.9.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 4. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 5 The petitioner no.1 was arrested on 4.4.2025 and petitioner no.2 was arrested on 18.4.2025, whereinafter, the investigation was carried out and the challan stands presented on 1.7.2025. Total 32 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is the conceded case before this Court that trial proceedings have not effectively commenced for want of requisite sanction against co-accused– Madan Lal. Keeping in view factual milieu of the case in hand; especially the petitioners having suffered incarceration for more than 01 year & 4 months, challan having been presented after culmination of investigation and trial has not effectively commenced for lack of requisite sanction against co-accused – Madan Lal; this Court is inclined to affirmatively consider the instant bail plea. The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50595 of 2026 -3- which shall essentially be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioners absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6. As per custody certificates dated 10.9.2026 and 11.9.2026 filed by learned State counsel, petitioner no.1 has already suffered incarceration for a period of 01 year, 4 months and 23 days and petitioner no.2 has already suffered incarceration for a period of 01 year, 4 months and 24 days & both the petitioners are not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioners shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioners shall not absent themselves on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioners shall deposit their passport, if any, with the trial Court. ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50595 of 2026 -4- (vi) The petitioners shall give their cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change their cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioners shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 11.9.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document