Rohtash v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.11417 of 2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.11417 of 2026 Date of decision : 18.3.2026 Date of uploading : 18.3.2026 Rohtash .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Sunil Goswami, 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 petitioner in case FIR No.23 dated 1.2.2025 under Sections 312, 313, 111(2)(b) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Narwana City, District Jind. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that on secret information, the petitioner alongwith his co-accused was arrested and one air pistol alongwith one Alto car was recovered from the petitioner, which is stated to have been used in the commission of offence. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that at this stage it cannot be stated that the alleged offence has been committed by using the aforesaid vehicle. Moreover, the recovered air pistol is not connected with the alleged offence. He further contends that the petitioner is in

CRM-M No.11417 of 2026 -2custody for the last 01 year, 01 month and 17 days. It is further stated that although the petitioner is involved in eight more cases, however, he is on bail in all those cases. Learned counsel further submits that the trial against the petitioner is running at a very slow pace as out of 17 prosecution witnesses, only 3 have been examined till date. As such, the trial of the case will take a long time to conclude. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious 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 17.3.2026 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.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year and 01 month and 17 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case (as per the custody certificate), this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. Moreover, bail is rule and jail is exception. Since the continuous incarceration of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, he is entitled to regular bail during the pendency of the trial. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.

CRM-M No.11417 of 2026 -37. 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, in 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 18.3.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No