Sanjay v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 27.11.2025 Sanjay .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***** Present :- Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

***** RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral) 1.

Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.383, dated 25.10.2024, under Sections 204, 205, 318(2), 318(4), 319 & 61(2) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Adampur, District Hisar.

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the police party, while on patrolling on 25.10.2024, received a secret information to the effect that some boys are travelling in two cars, i.e. one white Corolla car bearing registration No.HR-26-BF-9774 and second Swift Dzire bearing registration No.HR-32-F-3834. It was informed that they trapped innocent persons by alluring them with a promise to give three times of fake/duplicate currency in lieu of real currency. It was alleged that they were coming from Agroha turn and were heading towards Adampur side and in case of barricading, they could be apprehended. On receiving the

secret information, the police party reached the place as disclosed in the secret information and laid the barricading. Two cars, as disclosed in the secret information, were seen coming from Agroha turn and the same were signalled to stop. On asking, driver of swift Dzire car, disclosed his name as Ajay and the second person sitting in the car, disclosed his name as Raman, whereas, the driver of Corolla car, who was wearing uniform of ASI Deepak Kumar, disclosed his name as Anil and the person, who was wearing constable uniform, disclosed his name as Ajay and three persons, who were in civil uniform, disclosed their names as Ramanand, Azad and Sanjay (petitioner). Thereafter, search of both the cars was conducted. On conducting the search of Swift Dzire car, 27 bundles of notes were recovered and each bundle was checked.

In every bundle, currency notes of Rs.500 of 'Children Bank of India' were found. Thus, on recovery of the same, the FIR was registered and all 07 accused were arrested on the spot. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar praying for the grant of bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 09.01.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He, at the outset, prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the co-accused, namely, Devender @

Bittu and Raman Kumar. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 13.11.2025 passed in CRM-M No.21348 of 2025 and CRM-M No.47401 of 2025, whereby, co-accused, namely, Devender @ Bittu and Raman Kumar have been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 25.10.2024 and thus, has suffered an incarceration of more than 01 year. He has submitted that on the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail as the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said co-accused, who have already been granted bail. 4.

Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Devender @ Bittu and Raman Kumar. He has submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases as well. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. 5.

Heard.

6.

On hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the FIR was registered on the basis of secret information. The petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 25.10.2024. Co-accused, namely, Devender @ Bittu and Raman Kumar are already on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with them. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 01 year, 01 month and 02 days as on 26.11.2025. It further reflects that the petitioner is involved in 04 other cases, however in one case, he has been acquitted and in 02 cases, he is on bail. 7.

The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after

the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court.

8.

This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Thus, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail on parity.

9.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counted in this case.

27.11.2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) rittu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No