Deepak v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 1) CRM-M-6365-2025 Decided on : 22.08.2025 Deepak . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s) 2) CRM-M-10446-2025 Sonu . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s) 3) CRM-M-8600-2025 Rahul alias Chuhiwala . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s) 4) CRR-2597-2024 Anurag . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dhruv Trehan, Advocate and Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate, for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-8600-2025).

Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pratham Sethi, Advocate, for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-6365-2025).

Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate and Mr. Anupal Singh Tanwar, Advocate, for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-10446-2025).

Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner(s) (in CRR-2597-2024) and

- 2 - for the complainant (in CRM-M-6365-2025, CRM-M-10446-2025 and CRM-M-8600-2025).

Mr. PK Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Manoj Kaushik, Advocate and Mr. Vishavjeet, Advocate for Mr. Tanvir S. Grewal, Advocate for respondent No.2 (in CRR-2597-2024).

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

This order shall dispose of CRM-M-6365-2025, CRM-M10446-2025, CRM-M-8600-2025 & CRR-2597-2024, as all the petitions are interconnected and have arisen out of same FIR. However, the lead case is CRM-M-6365-2025.

2.

Regular bail petitions, i.e., CRM-M-6365-2025, CRM-M10446-2025 and CRM-M-8600-2025, have been filed by the petitioners seeking concession of regular bail in case FIR No.216 dated 01.09.2022, registered under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC, 1860 and Section 25(1-B) of the Arms Act, 1959 [Sections 109, 201, 216 and 212 IPC, 1860, added later on], at Police Station Civil Lines, Gurugram. Whereas, CRR-2597-2024 has been filed by the complainant - Anurag (petitioner therein), assailing the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, whereby application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning respondent No.2 - Rohtash Khatana, as an additional accused, was dismissed.

3.

In CRM-M-6365-2025 & other connected cases, on 21.07.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that only one accused, namely Chaman, was named in the FIR. However, during the course of investigation, in statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., five more accused were named. In the present set of regular bail petitions listed before this Court, none of the petitioners were named either in the

- 3 - FIR or in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Their names surfaced only on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused Chaman, leading to the implication of present petitioners, namely Deepak, Sonu, and Rahul Chuhiwala.

2.

It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused, Dharambir, who is facing trial separately, was granted the concession of regular bail, vide order dated 07.01.2025, passed in CRM-M-38678-2024 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Annexure P-11). Another coaccused, namely Joginder Khatana, who is being tried along with the petitioners herein, was also extended the benefit of regular bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 16.04.2024 passed in CRMM-50041-2023 (Annexure P-12). 3.

Thus, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners' claim for regular bail stands on parity, if not on a better footing, compared to the aforementioned co-accused. It is also pointed out that present stage of the trial is limited to defence evidence and final arguments. Statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. have already been recorded on 15.07.2025, and the next date before the trial Court is fixed for 23.07.2025.

4.

Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioners in the Court today and the same are taken on record. 5.

After hearing the arguments at length, proceedings in the present petitions are adjourned to 22.08.2025, to enable this Court to observe whether the trial Court is in a position to conclude the trial, before the next date of hearing fixed before this Court. However, it is clarified that in case, unnecessary adjournments are sought by counsel from either side, same shall be duly reflected in the zimni orders.

6.

A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases."

4.

Today, learned counsel for the respective parties jointly inform the Court that the trial has already concluded. The accused persons, who are petitioners in the aforesaid regular bail petitions, stand acquitted, while the remaining accused have been convicted.

5.

In view of the above, the regular bail petitions, i.e., CRM-M6365-2025, CRM-M-10446-2025 and CRM-M-8600-2025, are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

- 4 - So far as CRR-2597-2024 is concerned, since the trial itself has been concluded, the present revision petition is also dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 22, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No