Manjeet v. State Of Haryana
CRM-M-33801-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33801-2025 Date of decision: 08.07.2025 Manjeet
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present :
Mr. Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana.
****
, J. (Oral) 1.
The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in case FIR No.641 dated 09.08.2024, under Sections 115, 118(1), 3(5) , 351(2), 109(1) BNS 2023, registered at Police Station Sector 58, Faridabad, Haryana.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that due to some altercation, son of complainant Naveen was beaten by petitioner Manjeet and his brother Lokesh. Manjeet stabbed Naveen-son of the complainant in his stomach while his brother Lokesh held the injured. However, during trial while appearing as a prosecution witness, complainant-Sharda and the injured namely Naveen have not supported the case of the prosecution. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has undergone 09 months and 14 days custody. Learned counsel further submits that since the trial is likely to take some time to conclude and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, petitioner be released on regular bail. ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.10 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-33801-2025 4.
Notice of motion.
5.
Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 07.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 09 months and 14 days.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7.
In view of the above submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the undergone period and the fact that trial is likely to take such a long time and as such, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. 8.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
9.
However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.
( )
08.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.10 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document