← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/24231/2025allowed

Bajrangi v. State Of Haryana

2025-12-10Mr. Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor3 pages

CRM-M-24231-2025 (O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-24231-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.12.2025 BAJRANGI ....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present :

Mr. Vishal Thakur, Advocate for Mr. Baljeet Beniwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, Sr. DAG Haryana.

**** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR. J.(Oral) 1.

The present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.719 dated 21.09.2022, registered under Sections 392, 397, 452, 506, 34 of IPC, 1860 and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station Sector-58, Faridabad, District Faridabad. 2.

Status report dated 11.10.2025 filed by way of affidavit of Vivek Kundu, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mujeser, Faridabad filed by respondent-State is taken on record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel have been heard and material collected by the police during investigation has been perused.

4.

The present case was registered on the basis of complaint given to the Police by Rama Goyal with the allegations that on 21.09.2022, she along with her mother-in-law was present at home when at about 10.15 A.M., three unknown persons entered their house. They pointed a pistol and knife at them and threatened to kill them. Thereafter, they looted the jewellery weighing around 36 tolas and

CRM-M-24231-2025 (O&M) -2about 50-60 thousand in cash, and ran away from the spot. Petitioner was arrested on 14.02.2023 and co-accused namely Firoj and Islam Khan @ Poly were also arrested. After completion of investigation, final report has been presented. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that offence in question was committed by some unknown persons and subsequently, petitioner has been arrested but no test identification parade was got conducted. Co-accused namely Firoj and Islam Khan have already been released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.01.2025 in CRM-M-17039-2024 and 07.02.2025 in CRM-M-6448-2025, respectively. Learned counsel next contended that challan has already been presented and charges have been framed on 27.05.2024, and out of total 22 witnesses cited by prosecution, only 6 have been examined. The petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2023. Moreover, the case of the petitioner is identical to that of co-accused and the trial will take sufficiently long time to conclude and his further detention is not required and he may be released on bail 5.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the bail and argued that petitioner has committed a heinous offence and in view of the gravity of the offence, petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. 6.

Petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2023. Co-accused namely Firoj and Islam Khan have already been released on bail whose cases are identical to that of petitioner vide order dated 08.01.2025 in CRM-M-17039-2024 and 07.02.2025 in CRM-M-6448-2025, respectively. Charges have been framed on 27.05.2024 and only 6 witnesses have been examined, out of all 22 prosecution witnesses. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time to conclude and further detention of the petitioner is, thus, not required and he deserves to be released on bail. 7.

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case,

CRM-M-24231-2025 (O&M) -3the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8.

Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 10.12.2025 (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) Vishal Vardhan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned.

:

Yes/No Whether Reportable.

:

Yes/No