Rohit v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.9228 of 2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.9228 of 2026 Date of decision : 9.4.2026 Date of uploading : 9.4.2026 Rohit .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Viren Jain, Advocate and Ms. Shruti Mehta, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, 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 petitioner in case bearing FIR No.174 dated 30.8.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115, 117(2), 190, 191(3), 310(2) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 311 of BNS added and Section 310(2) of BNS deleted later on), registered at Police Station Sector 31, Ballabgarh, Faridabad. 2.

The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:- 'To, The SHO, Police Station Faridabad, Sector 31, Sir, It is Requested that I, Manish S/o Pawan, Permanent resident of Village, Fatehpura, Sadan, District Agra. My brother-in-law namely Sachin is a distributor of Amul Milk. Today, on 30.08.2025, at approximately 04:30 AM, I along

CRM-M No.9228 of 2026 -2with others got down from vehicle No.-HR 38 AD 3368 at IMT and after unloading the milk separately, when we reached Anuradha's shop in SLF Mall Spring Field Colony Rajiv Nagar, Amit who is a distributor of Mother Dairy, who was already present there, was surrounded by 10-15 boys and they were beating him, so Amit called us for help. As soon as Sachin and I got down from the vehicle, those 10-15 boys started attacking us indiscriminately with rods, sticks, rods, knives and blades, so Amit ran away from there. They beat us severely and fled, taking both our mobile phones and a bag containing 12,000 rupees. They threatened to kill us if we complained to the police or were seen there again. We lay there injured.

After some time, my brother-in-law's brother Satyapal and Ashok came there, who with the help of our friends got us admitted in ASIAN HOSPITAL SEC 21. Our mobile no. are 9971726985, 8958504556 respectively. My brother-in-law and I have very serious injuries. Sir, I request you to take strictest action against these 10-15 boys. On asking around, some boys told the names of 4-5 boys. Rohit, Sachin, Ritesh, Sonu alias Gulshan and 7-8 others. Signature-Manish Applicant Mansih.' 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 2.9.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a young man aged 19 years with no criminal antecedents. Learned counsel has further argued that one Manish is stated to have been received a fracture but specific attribution qua the petitioner is not there. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4.

Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of affidavit of Sanjeev Kumar, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sarai, Faridabad in Court today. The same be taken on record. Raising submissions in tandem with the said status report, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are

CRM-M No.9228 of 2026 -3serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 8.4.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 2.9.2025, whereinafter, the investigation was carried out and the challan qua the petitioner was presented on 21.11.2025. Total 27 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is conceded case of the parties that none has been examined till date. The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues 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 petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1 As per custody certificate dated 8.4.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 7 months and 7 days & is 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. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However,

CRM-M No.9228 of 2026 -4in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner 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 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 9.4.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No