Nadeem v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.48334 of 2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.48334 of 2025 Date of decision : 27.11.2025 Date of uploading : 27.11.2025 Nadeem .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Ms. Rosi, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.166 dated 22.7.2025 under Sections 13(1), 13(3) and 17 of Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015, registered at Police Station Pinangwan, District Nuh.

2.

The gravamen of the FIR in question is that on an information, the police party conducted a raid in Kasai Mohalla and caught 2 persons namely Wakeel @ Wakki son of Babudin and Nadeem son of Wakeel @ Wakki. Rest all persons were managed to escape. On search and disclosure, total 7 quintal 10 Kgs. beef, 2 cow legs, 8 motor cycles and slaughtering tools were recovered from Wakeel @ Wakki, Nafees, Irfan,

CRM-M No.48334 of 2025 -2Nadeem and Hasan and accordingly case was registered. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 22.7.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further argued that the culmination of the investigation into the FIR in question is complete and challan already stands presented. Learned counsel has further submitted that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in further incarceration as the trial will take long. Learned counsel has further submitted that a similarly placed co-accused namely Wakeel @ Wakki has been extended the concession of regular bail by the Sessions Court vide order dated 30.10.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of law have not been complied with, and therefore, the alleged recovery from the petitioner suffers from inherent defects. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4.

Learned State counsel has filed affidavit of Prithvi Singh, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nuh in Court today. The same be kept on record. Copy thereof has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. Raising submissions in tandem with the said affidavit, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 25.11.2025 in Court, which is taken on record.

5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the

CRM-M No.48334 of 2025 -3available records of the case. 6.

The petitioner was arrested on 22.7.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out and challan stands presented on 22.9.2025. Total 13 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but none has been examined till date. It is, thus, indubitable that culmination of trial, but of course, will take its own time. The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues which shall essentially be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1 As per custody certificate dated 25.11.2025 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 4 months and 3 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or

CRM-M No.48334 of 2025 -4documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 27.11.2025 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No