Vikas Alias Vicky v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-21229-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21229-2025 Date of Decision: 17.07.2025 VIKAS @ VICKY ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 in case FIR No. 367 dated 08.05.2024 under Sections 148,149,307,323,325,506 and 120B of the IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Camp, District Palwal. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the co-accused have given injuries to one Dushyant @ Deepankar. It is alleged that the petitioner was armed with pistol and fired upon the complainant with an intention to kill him.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that PW-4 during the evidence has turned hostile and has not supported the case of the prosecution. The petitioner is in custody since 22.08.2024. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in the Court today and the same is taken on record. The petitioner is Renu Rawat 2025.07.18 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-21229-2025 -2in custody for more than 11 months. He vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that he is involved in another case.

6.

Mr. Akash Vashisht, Advocate appears and accepts notice on behalf of the complainant. He has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than 11 months, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

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 bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

10.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) 17.07.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2025.07.18 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document