CRM-M- IN T 226 Sahil @ Sa v. State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. registered a Section 25 present peti 2. being taken way of aff Beri, Distri -9727-2026 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ CHANDIGA l @ Sahil Kumar of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Gurdeep Singh Nehra, Ad Mr. Vishal Singh, AAG, Harya **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in case tered against him under Sections 379B on 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station nt petition under Section 483 of BNSS Relevant facts necessary for d taken from paras 4 and 5 of the statu of affidavit of Anil Kumar, HPS, A District Jhajjar, be noticed hereinbelo “4. On 01.04.2022, a infor Police Station to the Investiga robbery at a Liquor Vend in investigation agency reached 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-9727-2026 Date of Decision: 27.03.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. ra, Advocate for the petitioner. , Haryana. n case FIR No. 158 dated 01.04.202 379B, 392 of Indian Penal Code an Station Beri, District Jhajjar, has file BNSS. for disposal of the present petition e status report dated 09.03.2026 filed b PS, Assistant Commissioner of Polic inbelow:- information was received from MH stigation agency that there has been nd in Sheriya. On this informatio hed at the place of occurrence whe .2026 .2022, ode and as filed ition are filed by Police, MHC been a ation where GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -9727-2026 -2 the complainant Vicky S/o Ba Jhajjar moved his written co SHO, Police Station, Beri, I r Balraj, resident of village G studied till class 7th, my age contract vend in village She around 10:30 AM, I and my f of Sheriya were sitting at the with 3 boys riding on it stopp remained sitting on the bike bike and came in front of the name is Sahil (present petiti Gochhi, Sahil and another b mouth was covered with a cl took out a pistol and picked up kept at the vend, showing t around Rs.5800/- which were boys rode their bike and ran to incident is recorded in the CC I will present to you that Sah with him, whose names and action should be taken agains police station about this incide 5. That on the basis of afo No. 158 dated 01.04.2022 w 2- o Balraj R/o Village Gangtan Distri n complaint in the manner that, “T i, I request that my name is Vicky S e Gangtan, District Jhajjar, I hav ge is 30 years, I have taken a liquo Sheriya. Today on 01.04.2022, my friend Vijay S/o Hawasin reside t the liquor vend, when a Pulsar bik stopped in front of my vend, one bo ike and two boys got down from th the shop, one of whom I know, who etitioner) S/o Mahender resident er boy whom I do not know, who a cloth, came inside the shop, Sah ed up 4 100 PIPER bottles which we ng the pistol towards me, took o ere kept on the cash box and all thre an towards village Sheriya, this enti e CCTV camera installed in the ven Sahil and two other boys who cam nd addresses I do not know. Leg ainst these three. I have informed th cident by phone. f aforesaid complaint, the present FI 2 was initially registered U/s 379 istrict t, “To ky S/o have liquor 22, at sident r bike e boy m the whose ent of hose Sahil h were k out l three entire vend. came Legal ed the nt FIR 379B, GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- motion, du prepared a under Secti were taken petitioner, Village Go been arres registered u Police Stat confessed securing th present cas the petition same was a 3. then, petiti however, o the date fix 3), his (P) cancelled a through No relevant tim -9727-2026 -3 392 of IPC and Section 25, District Jhajjar and the investi After the registration of the F on, during which place of occurrenc ared and CCTV footage of the inci r Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, taken into possession. Documen ioner, namely, Sahil, son of Mohinde ge Gochi, Jhajjar, co-accused Vinod arrested in another case bearing tered u/s 379B, 392, 506 of IPC and S e Station Dujana, during the course essed to their involvement in the ring their production warrants, they nt case on 21.4.2022. Pursuant thereto, an applicatio etitioner before the learned Addition was allowed vide order dated 24.5.20 Brief submission of learned c petitioner had been regularly appear ver, on account certain unavoidable re ate fixed. Resultantly, in terms of orde is (P) bail was cancelled, bail bon elled and forfeited to the State. His p gh Non-bailable Warrants. Learned c ant time, i.e., around 16.1.2025, pe 3- 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act in P.S. Ber vestigation was set into motion.” f the FIR, investigations were set in currence was inspected, site plan wa e incident accompanied by certifica e Act, handed over by the complainan cuments further reveal that prese ohinder Singh, resident of Teshil Ber Vinod alias Kala and Sachin, who ha aring FIR No. 68 dated 01.04.202 and Section 25-54-59 of Arms Act, ourse of interrogation of the said cas the present case. Resultantly, aft , they were formally arrested in th lication for grant of bail was moved dditional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar. Th 4.5.2023. rned counsel for petitioner is that sinc appearing before the concerned Cour able reasons, he (P) could not appear o of order dated 16.01.2025 (Annexure P il bonds and surety bonds were als His presence was sought to be secure rned counsel further submits that at th , petitioner was in fact admitted . Beri, set into lan was rtificate lainant, present il Beri, ho had 4.2022, Act, at id case, y, after in the oved by r. The at since Court, pear on exure P- also secured at at the itted in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Rehabilitati could not b petitioner w registered u Police Stat arrested in intentionall but the abse deserves to of trial in th witnesses, submission not serve a rights unde trial but wo incarcerati made. 4. 4. State couns the relief moved any he (P) was been broug 16.1.2025, -9727-2026 -4 bilitation Centre and was undergoing not be brought to the notice of the C ioner was arrested in another case bear tered u/s 379B, 392, 506 of IPC and S e Station Dujana. After securing his ted in the present case on 30.4.2025 an Learned counsel further co tionally remain absent from the Court absence was on account of reasons m It is further the submission of rves to be taken in favour of petitione al in the near future is quite remote, fo esses, only 10 have been examined. issions advanced hereinabove, further erve any useful purpose as the same under Article 21 of the Constitution would also be against the princip eration is an exception”. Prayer fo Per contra, while opposing the counsel submits that petitioner, a ha sought for. Even on 16.1.2025, any application seeking exemption was actually admitted in Rehabilita brought to the attention of Court. 2025, 3 PWs were present but they 4- ergoing treatment. However, this fa f the Court. Subsequently, on 5.4.202 e bearing FIR No. 68 dated 01.04.202 and Section 25-54-59 of Arms Act, ng his production warrants, he was r 025 and has been in custody since then er contends that petitioner did n Court on the date fixed, i.e. 16.1.202 asons mentioned hereinabove. ion of learned counsel that lenient vie titioner as the likelihood of completio ote, for still out of 19 cited prosecutio ined. When viewed in the light of th further incarceration of petitioner wou same would not only be violative of ution of India, including right to speed rinciple of “Bail is a general rule an for allowing the petition has bee the request for grant of bail, learne habitual offender does not deserv neither he (P) himself appeared ption from appearing in the Court. abilitation Centre, this fact could hav Court. Further, on the same day, could not be examined on accou this fact 2022, 4.2022, Act, at was re- ce then. did not .1.2025, nt view pletion secution t of the would his speedy and been learned deserve nor If have i.e. account GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- of sudden counsel th concession not appeari prayed for. 5. documents 6. leading to of this orde remained been menti case, out has already the prospec of the opin of his right speedy trial and incarc Dataram (Criminal) 7. petitioner, may prejud his furnishi -9727-2026 -5 dden absence of petitioner. It is furthe that given the past antecedent ession of bail, likelihood of petitioner ppearing in the Court is quite high. for. Heard learned counsel for ments on record. Reverting back to the facts of to lodging of registration of FIR ha order. There is also no denying involved in four other criminal mentioned in para 19 of the status of 19 cited prosecution witnesses lready been noted that since 16.1.202 rospect of completion of trial in near e opinion that his (P) further incarcera s rights under Article 21 of the Consti dy trial but would also be against the p carceration is an exception” as held vs. State of Uttar Pradesh inal) 131. In view of submissions adva oner, but without commenting further prejudice the trial, petitioner is granted rnishing bail bonds and two local sure 5- further the submission of learned Sta cedents and record, if extended tioner fleeing from process of justice high. Dismissal of petition has bee for the parties and perused of the case in hand, factual aspec have already been noticed in para of the fact that that petitioner minal cases, the details of which hav report. Admittedly, in the prese nesses, only 10 have been examined. .1.2025, petitioner has been in custod future is quite remote, this Court carceration would not only be violativ Constitution of India, including right t the principle of “Bail is a general ru as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court esh and another, 2018(2) R.C.R advanced by learned counsel for further on the merits of the case, lest granted the concession of bail subject sureties to the satisfaction of learne State the stice by been the aspects para 2 has have present ined. It custody, Court is iolative right to al rule ourt in R.C.R. the lest it bject to learned GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- trial Court/ following c 8. that in case -9727-2026 -6 Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. T wing conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not the trial. (ii) The petitioner will prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall su learned trial court and shall n permission of the trial Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not offence of which, he is an acc he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall n induce, threaten or promise to facts of the case so as to dissu facts to the Court or to any evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not (vii) The petitioner shall f number to the Trial Court fo same till the conclusion of the the petitioner seeks to chang shall be done only with prio Court, stating the reason for th (viii) The petitioner will appe and every date fixed, unless i Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty M condition, as deemed app petitioner. Accordingly, the present petiti in case there is any breach of the afore 6- ed. The petitioner shall abide by th not tamper with the evidence durin ill not pressurize/ intimidate th surrender his passport before th all not leave the country without prio urt. l not commit an offence similar to th accused, or for commission of whic ll not directly or indirectly coerc ise to any person acquainted with th dissuade him/her from disclosing suc any police officer or tamper with th not in any manner misuse his liberty ll furnish his address and mobi rt forthwith and shall not change th f the trial and in case for any reaso ange any of the aforesaid, the sam prior intimation to the learned Tri for the same. appear before the trial Court on eac ess is exempted by a specific order ty Magistrate may impose any oth appropriate while releasing th t petition is allowed and it is made cle e aforesaid conditions, the State shall b by the during e the re the t prior to the which oerce, ith the g such ith the berty. obile ge the eason, same Trial each der of other g the de clear shall be GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- at liberty t order. 9. herein are l construed a independen 27.03.2026 gbs -9727-2026 -7 erty to seek cancellation of bail as In view of the above, it is cla re limited for the purpose of prese trued as an opinion on the merits of the endently of the aforesaid observations .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 7- ail as granted to the petitioner by th t is clarified that the observations mad f present proceedings and would not b s of the case and the trial would procee ations. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No by this ns made d not be proceed NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document