Sachin Alias Parshant v. State Of Haryana









 

 











 !

!

"






CRM-M-52030-2025
SACHIN ALIAS PARSHANT 

 STATE OF HARYANA










CRM-M-71455-2025
GAUTAM NARANG 

 STATE OF HARYANA










#

 $%
#
 &
' 
&
 (
)))))
  


 
  
 

 




CRM-M-52030-2025.



   
 
 

 




CRM-M-71455-2025.


 
!"#



$ %
& ' 

(((((
' 
&
 (*

+ ,-.

 ) 






*
+ "
+'

#
,


-.
 
+

*
 
+'





 !


/0


 
1

*,"
+ "


+

-.
2 
3
 
445   
,


/0




-2-



66
 



46/0

/0
7
64
6/08
6/70 
3
37/0

)2
47
/




)2
47

" 

0
  

 "


 


- +
$  
- +

7

-


 "

'
 

 
 
+

 




94744
!





,






"
9 ,

, 


     

                 

 



   !   " # $%%&'()*# 

   + , # )

 ! 

  

 

   %-.%%-%/#       #      +0 *

1 $ .-%'()*#

 $   $234()*#   5

 $'3.()*#



   6  7  # )

    -89-- :   

     0;<&8, <&&3/
    

 *  *

  $.-%#       ; (; :

# = # *    


 )!; $ 82 

%&-'%-%.# ( %4<4/<42   # 6   # )     $

1 = # )

  

    0

 > #  

  =# )   )      #   $    

    

< 

 

  $.&3%-.-4    .-        5

   

     

< 

 

  $.3--2-/'  .-   .%9'- 6:# 

  

  0?

  #       @    # 



   5

     

1  $

1 =     -.94- 6:#     $0<2      

 #      @ 

 



    



-3- )

*      

  #  1   





1      

#

1     

#    3<8 



  # 

       <

   #  

  

 

  

A

 ;     

 

       1 B     # 1  

  1 #  





  

   



  # 

   # 

 1 # :5# =  # ;  


 



1   

#

     ?  ! <

 

   ?  #  

       1    5

   



            

  !    # 1 

    5

 # 

            

                5

    $  #         



 /3 .-- 6 #



 

     

            

  

 *    A #   ;  

   5      #    



 

   5        

 *         

   #      

5

  5

   ;      # 

<..%# 



, 

0 #)  C A

 #   

 



 ; 

 

 

   5



 )           1#  

 

1 # :5#=  #;  #

-4-   





#

 

 

       

    ;     

 0  

  1        

 D 4.

Learned State Counsel contends that one Ravi Kumar, a hardened criminal and gangster involved in as many as 29 cases had been produced before the trial Court i.e. Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad. It is submitted that an attempt was made to free the said accused-Ravi Kumar who while being ferried, got the Police vehicle stopped on the pretext of answering the call of nature, whereupon an attack was opened upon the Police party. There were five persons who were armed and opened gunfire and as a result of the cross-fire, one assailant died on the spot while one died on the way to the Hospital.

It is contended so far as the petitioner-Sachin @ Parshant (Petitioner in CRM-M-52030-2025) is concerned, he is brother-inlaw of the deceased gangster Ravi Kumar and that he had undertaken the reccee and facilitated the attempted escape of Ravi Kumar. It is further alleged that in relation to Gautam Narang (Petitioner in CRM-M-714552025), his car was used by the assailants in carrying out the incident in question. It is contended that the weapon in question had been obtained from Akshay @ Rajput (Petitioner in CRM-M-8609-2026 which has been withdrawn today). It is alleged that the petitioner(s) had thus conspired with all the other assailants in facilitating the attempted escape of the gangster Ravi Kumar. It is also contended that Police Official(s) sustained injuries in the said case.

5.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner(s)-Gautam Narang contends that his car had been borrowed by his neighbour Manoj @

-5Mauji for attending a wedding function and that in good faith, he handed over the said car as he was unaware of the criminal antecedents of Manoj @ Mauji. It is further argued that there is no other criminal case registered against the petitioner and he is in custody since 18.08.2025. The investigation qua him is complete and no recovery of any nature whatsoever has been effected from him.

6.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner(s)-Sachin @ Parshant submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.01.2025 and has been nominated as an accused solely because of his familial relation with the gangster-Ravi Kumar. He contends that the very fact that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused for commission of offence under Section 498A of the IPC at the behest of his wife (sister of the deceased gangster-Ravi Kumar), there is hardly any possibility of the petitioner facilitating any act for securing release of his brother-in-law- Ravi Kumar. 7.

On a pointed query, Counsel for the respondent-State submits that there are total 67 witnesses to be examined by the prosecution and no witnesses has been examined so far. It is also not disputed by the learned State Counsel that the persons who were present at the spot and opened fire at the police party have all been arrested and are since then in custody. 8.

Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner(s), the absence of recovery, the nomination on the basis of the disclosure statement, the stage of the trial as well as the period of custody already undergone, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner(s) on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

-66

!

 



""

#
 



/0




+
"

*,"
+ "



,



:,  
+ "
+

8,  '
+




  

"
9 , 8$, '
*   


4


.


"




/0
""

;  
 '
 

""

", 
 '


,

#



 '




 "'

 "'



!
+




+


""

+

 ,

 ; 


 



 

!

"
9 ,
""
 




+ 

 "+"
  "

+' 
&
 (.




!

"







 
  < 
1

*8 



=82 < 


+"

=82