Rohtash @ Bunti Baba v. State Of Haryana

REEMA SAINI 2026.05.01 15:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-19427 of 2026 (O&M) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was behind bars w.e.f. 30.10.2025. Prosecutrix has since been examined. She did not support prosecution case, therefore, petitioner deserved to be enlarged on regular bail.

Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail. He, however, conceded that out of 12, 2 witnesses including the prosecutrix has been examined.

Copy of statement of prosecutrix recorded during the course of trial has been placed on record. She has denied the involvement of the petitioner in the offence. Antecedents of the petitioner are clean. He is behind bars for the last about 6 months. 10 witnesses are yet to be examined and conclusion of trial by an early date is not insight. Since prosecutrix has been examined, chances of petitioner tampering with evidence are substantially reduced. In the facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits, petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 01.05.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No REEMA SAINI 2026.05.01 15:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh