Mujmil @ Mujammil v. State Of Haryana

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH


Decided on: 28.04.2026
  

......Petitioner
Versus
 

  ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

Present:




 



 

****
SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)

 
 




 




 
!"
"


 
#$
%&%
"!
!

!


 
!
'()
%&*

+%%&%
 


+,
+*


(-.
 /&
0

%,
, 
,+

 
!  
-

)1"

2 
 

%


 

+%%&% 
 
 
  

) 
3 
 

 
4 

 

 
 

 5&&
-

4
!

"



6!
3  
"
4


 
 



 



 ,

4 

!


 
"
/7*
"4

 
 

 
 

"  
8

 


"


"
4 
 
4
 
4

 
 
 
4

  


. 
2!
9

- 


-2-
)  &&&&:7
 



 
4 
 !
 
 

"

 !

 


9
 

 

 
 
 



 


 
 

 




 

 
 
'();
 



 

 
 

  
 

7 
  
 ;
 

7  
 


! 
 

!

 
 


 & %&%

 


 
< !
 ;
 
 



= 

 

.;

 

 
( 
- 
#(-$

 

4
  >
 
 


  
 

 
 
 ;

 


  
 


 
 

4
 
4 
 
 ;
 




 

*&*%&%,;
 !


 

 
 

 



 

.;

4
"

 

 


 
 
4



"!
 

   
 ;

 
 

 

!







,

 
!

-


?
@ 
4 

 

.



 

  7


4

!



% & %&%/
0
 

 %*& %&%/
  
 

!


 

4 
 !
 
 
 

 




 


 

!
 
4
7 
 

 

-3-
 
4 


 
"

 ;
 



 

)  ,&&:7


;
 






 

 
;
 
 

 = 

 
 
 

  
 




 
  ;
4

 




 
 
( 
- 
#(-$



  ;
 
 !

 

 

 

 

.;
 
7  
  
 
4 

 
 


!
 
 

!


 

.

/
@ 
7.

Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the present case and the rival contentions of the parties, this Court finds merit in the present petition on the following aspects:

(1) the petitioner has been in custody for the last 09 months & 11 days;

(2) the co-accused namely, Tahir, who is on the same footing, has been granted the concession of regular bail vide orders dated 18.03.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nuh;

(3) the complainant in the present case, has already been examined by the trial Court, so there is no apprehension that the petitioner will tamper with the evidence;

trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession

-4-
of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment as culpability is to be decided by trial Court after appreciating evidence adduced by the parties, and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case

!
 
 

!


 


9.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

10.

Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the main case.

(SUBHAS MEHLA)
JUDGE
28.04.2026
Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable:

YES/NO