Ishwar Alias Mintu v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-40202-2025 -1- (219)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40202-2025 Date of Decision: 19.11.2025 ISHWAR ALIAS MINTU ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Virender Soni, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.64 dated 06.06.2025 registered under Sections 287, 351(2) of BNS and Section 25 of Arms Act at Police Station Charkhi Dadri.

2.

The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Sudhir S/o Lt. Mahabir and the same reads as under:- "To, SHO Sahib, Police Station Bond Kalan, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana. Respected Sir, It is requested that I, Sudhir, son of Late Shri Mahabir Singh, resident of Ward No. 7, Village Bond Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana, am making a submission to you regarding a serious incident:-On the night of 4th June 2025 at around 10:30 PM, Ishwar alias Mintu, son of Sompal, a resident of our village Bond Kalan, came outside our house and

CRM-M-40202-2025 -2started abusing loudly. His wife took him inside the house. However, after that, from inside the house, he threatened to kill the three of us brothers - Sanjay, Sudhir (myself), and Ashok (although Ashok was not present there at that time). Shortly after, two loud gunfire-like sounds were heard from the direction in front of our house, which terrified me and my family. We ourselves did not see the gun, but a loud sound like gunfire was clearly heard, upon which some of our neighbours also came out of their houses. We can also get this verified from the neighbours. This incident is one that disturbs peace in the village and creates a serious threat to the safety of our life and property. Therefore, it is requested that:

1. An FIR be registered against the accused Ishwar alias Mintu under Sections 294 (abuse), 504 (insult), 506 (threat), 336 (endangering life of others) IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act (if it is proven that firing took place), for illegal possession and firing of weapon or any other relevant sections that may apply. 2. Inspection of the incident site be carried out and evidence be collected. 3. Verification from villagers be done and appropriate legal action be taken. The audio-video recording of the threat has already been given to Ravindra ji through mobile.Hence, you are requested to take prompt and strict action in this matter so that such incidents do not recur in the future.Dated: 06.06.2025 Sd/- Sudhir." 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Taking the allegations to be correct, it is a case where no injury has been caused to

CRM-M-40202-2025 -3anyone. The registration of the FIR stems out of a civil dispute between the parties. As the petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2025 but only 04 of the 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

3.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel while referring to the reply dated 25.09.2025 contends that the petitioner was apprehended and the recovery of a country-made pistol along with two empty cartridges came to be effected from him. The nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner does not entitle him to the concession of bail as prayed for. He, however concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2025 and that only 04 of the 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5.

The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is a first-time offender, in custody since 06.06.2025 but only 04 of the 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required. 6.

Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner-Ishwar @ Mintu S/o Sompal is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

CRM-M-40202-2025 -47. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

8.

The petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 19.11.2025 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No