Ashu v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Date of Decision:- 05.05.2026 Ashu ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Sanpreet Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Surender Singh Pannu, Addl. A.G., Haryana. ***** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.270 dated 25.07.2025 registered under Sections 109, 110, 190, 191(3), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 324(4) and 238(C) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Sadar Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar.

2.

Briefly stated, on 24.07.2025, when the complainant-Vansh was celebrating his birthday along with his friends, when petitioner along with coaccused, armed with wooden sticks, iron rods, pipes, sharp-edged weapon and ice pick approached the complainant party and started beating them. The accused persons also damaged the complainant's motor-cycle bearing registration No.HR-02AW-4589. Hence, the FIR was registered. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was armed with danda and gave danda blows to the complainant and his friends. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for concession of bail to the petitioner on the following grounds:

( 2 ) I. That in the present case, the complainant and the injured witnesses have already been examined and certified copies of testimonies of the aforesaid witnesses are on record stating therein that they have not supported the case of the prosecution.

II. Petitioner is in custody since 08.09.2025 i.e. for the last more than 07 months.

III. Petitioner is having clean and clear antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal activity, except the present one. IV. A compromise has already been effected between the parties. V. Case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of coaccused, Prince, who has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2026 passed in CRM-M-13628-2026. VI. The trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. 4.

Learned State Counsel opposed the present petition on the following grounds:

I. Petitioner was armed with danda and gave danda blows to the complainant and his friends.

II. That arrest of two accused are still pending. However, it is not disputed by learned State counsel that case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of co-accused, Prince, who has already been released on bail.

6.

Heard.

7.

Keeping in view the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds merits in the present petition on the following grounds:

( 3 ) I.

The complainant and injured witnesses have already been examined and did not support the case of prosecution and certified copies of their terstimonies have also been placed on record. II.

The petitioner has been behind bars since 08.09.2025 i.e. for the last more than 07 months.

III.

Petitioner has clean and clear antecedents and he is not involved in any other case except the present one.

IV.

Case of the present petitioner is on similar footings as that of coaccused, Prince, who has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2026 passed in CRM-M-13628-2026. V.

A compromise has been effected between the parties. VI.

The trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. VII.

No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period.

8.

As concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is a rule, jail is an exception. Hence, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 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. ( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 05.05.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No