Bablu v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-13457-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.222 CRM-M-13457-2026 Date of Decision: 17.03.2026 BABLU

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Jasmine Gill, AAG, Haryana.

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

First petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 496 dated 29.12.2025, registered under Sections 127(2), 3(5), 304, 307 deleted (Section 310(2), 311, 331(6), 61(2), 317(3), 238 of BNS added later on) and Sections 395, 397, 458, 120-B, 412 and 201 IPC (added later on) at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad.

2.

It is alleged that the petitioner, along with co-accused, committed dacoity in the godown of the complainant and took away goods/boxes of cigarettes worth approximately ₹70-80 lakhs. It is further alleged that the petitioner got recovered the vehicle used in the commission of the offence, nine cartons of cigarettes which were robbed from the complainant's godown, and ₹90,000/- in cash.

ANU 2026.03.17 17:42 I am the author of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-13457-2026 3.

Learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner is not the principal accused in the commission of the alleged robbery/dacoity. However, his role is stated to be confined to the purchase of the alleged stolen goods from co-accused Mohammad Omar, who has named the present petitioner in his disclosure statement.

4.

Keeping in view the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the fact that he is not attributed the role of a principal offender in the alleged dacoity, and that the allegations against him are primarily that he purchased the stolen goods from co-accused Mohammad Omar, coupled with the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last approximately two months and co-accused Mukesh has already been granted bail, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of bail. 5.

Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when required and shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness.

6.

However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 7.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 17.03.2026 JUDGE Anu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No ANU 2026.03.17 17:42 I am the author of this document Chandigarh