Babli v. State Of Haryana

217+219 CRM-M-15699-2026 Babli ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent CRM-M-16477-2026 Saroj ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent Date of decision: 18.05.2026 CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Sahil Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-15699-2026.

Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-16477-2026.

Ms. Malvika Singh, DAG,Haryana *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing CRM-M-156992025 and CRM-M-16477-2026 as these are arising out of same FIR. For brevity, the facts are being taken from CRM-M-15699-2026. 2.

These petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS in case FIR No.815 dated 30.12.2025 under Sections 190 BNS/149 IPC, 191(3)BNS/148 IPC, 115BNS/321 IPC, 221BNS/ 186 IPC, 121(1) BNS/332 IPC, 132 BNS/ 353 IPC, 324 (6) BNS/430 IPC, 121(2) BNS/ 333 IPC, 352 BNS/504 IPC and 3 of PDPP Act registered at Police Station HTM, District Hisar, Haryana.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that during a demolition drive in the vicinity of the colony of the petitioners, an incident took place wherein one Rajesh Kumar, son of Daulat Ram, set himself on fire, while the petitioners and other accused were restraining the police from performing their duties and carrying out the demolition drive.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that although the petitioners were stated to be present at the spot and are visible in the video footage, no overt act has been attributed to them except their presence and raising slogans/noise. It is further argued that the petitioners have been roped into the present case solely on account of their presence at the place of occurrence.

5.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners trashed the Bailiffs of the Court and police officials when they had gone to execute the warrants of possession issued by ld. CJ(JD) Hisar and one of the police officials sustained grievous injury in the occurrence. Custody certificates of the petitioners have been filed in Court today and are taken on record. As per the custody certificates, the petitioners are in custody for more than 03 months and 29 day and are not involved in any other case. 6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are in custody for 03 months and 29 days; petitioners are not involved in any other case coupled with the fact that the trial is yet to commence and will take a considerable long time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served for further incarceration of the petitioners. Accordingly, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners during the pendency of the trial. 8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioners are found indulging in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of their bail. 11.

Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. 18.05.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No