← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/38647/2025allowed

Ravi Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2025-11-17Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary3 pages

 CRM-M-38647-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38647-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.11.2025 Ravi Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Mr. Rajesh Bansal and Mr. Naveen Nandal, Advocates for the petitioner Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG Haryana ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0304 dated 17.06.2024, registered under Sections 323, 302, 149 and 148 IPC (Sections 201, 34 IPC added and 148, 149 deleted later on) at Police Station Thanesar Sadar, District Kurukshetra.

2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and about 5 months. He alleges false implication in the case, though in the FIR, the only allegation against him is of having caught hold the deceased. The motive, even if there was any, was with the co-accused Anshul, whose mother, is stated to be having an affair with the deceased as per his disclosure statement. Charges have been framed on 04.12.2024, however, out of 26 prosecution witnesses, only 8 have been examined. Reference is made to the order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the trial Court, wherein despite issuance of bailable warrants, the witnesses are not turning up. The petitioner is suffering from a severe heart ailment, medical record has been appended as Annexure P-3. He also

 CRM-M-38647-2025 (O&M) 2 has a complaint of Right Inguinal Hernia and is undergoing heart treatment from Heart Centre, Ambala Cantt. for CAD, as per the medical status report of Medical Officer, District Jail, Kurukshetra. The petitioner is not involved in any other case. 3.

The custody certificate dated 14.11.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 1 year, 4 months and 19 days.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are serious allegations against the petitioner of having caught hold the deceased. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner not being involved in any other case. 5.

Heard.

6.

  

     

  



      

  

   

       

      

     !"  

 #  #  !  

     

   !    

  $   

    %

     

7.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

 CRM-M-38647-2025 (O&M) 3 (iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

8.

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

9.

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 17.11.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No