Akash Alias Kashi v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.44807 of 2025 Date of Decision: 22.08.2025 Akash @ Kashi ..... Petitioner versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr. Azad Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, 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.56, dated 19.02.2024, under Sections 323, 324, 34, 341, 506 of IPC, 1860 (Sections 307, 326, 148, 149 of IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Civil Line Jind, District Jind, Haryana.

2.

Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Ankit. It was alleged that on 17.02.2024, when he was going along with his friend, namely, Saurabh and was sitting on the pillion seat of his motorcycle, then at about 02:00/03:00 P.M., 03-04 boys on two motorcycles came and stopped their bike from front and behind of their motorcycle. Harsh, resident of Arhika stabbed him with knife and others gave them kick blows

 to them. They received injuries and thus, it attracted the crowd at the scene of the occurrence. The assailants escaped from the place of the occurrence. They were shifted to PGI, Rohtak. It was alleged that Harsh, Sandeep and Gugan have caused injuries to them and thus, the legal action be taken against them. On registration of FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case. The petitioner was arrested on 10.04.2024. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, praying for grant of regular bail, however, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 30.07.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for grant of 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 roped in the present case. He has submitted that neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor any role has been attributed on him. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused, which is not even an admissible evidence. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 10.04.2025, however there is no progress in the trial. He has submitted that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Nishant @ Harsh, Gugan and Sandeep have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-61775-2024; CRM-M-13524-2025 and

 CRM-M-16344-2025. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail. 4.

Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She has submitted that the petitioner is a part of unlawful assembly. She has submitted that the petitioner is involved in 04 other cases. She, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 14 prosecution witnesses, only 05 witnesses including the complainant have been examined so far. She has endorsed the fact that the co-accused of the petitioner have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2025. She has placed on record custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court and the same is taken on record. 5.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 10.04.2024. The petitioner has been arrayed as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 01 year, 04 months and 11 days as on 21.08.2025. Out of 14 prosecution witnesses, 05 witnesses have been examined so far. Co-accused of the petitioner has already been released on bail.

6.

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. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Thus, keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the

 petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and 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. However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within 07 days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counted in this case. 8.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 22.08.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable :Yes/No