Pawan v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-55734-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-55734-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.01.2026 Yogender @ Golu ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

Pawan ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

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

Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-55734-2025 Mr. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-60494-2025 Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG Haryana Mr. Akshit Mehta, Advocate for the complainant ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

These cases are disposed of by this common order as they arise out of the same FIR.

2.

Prayer in the present petitions filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.89 dated 17.05.2025, registered under Sections 310(2), 311, 61(2) BNS at Police Station Chhansa, District Faridabad.

3.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioners have been in custody for about 7 months and more than 7 months respectively. They allege false

CRM-M-55734-2025 (O&M) 2 implication. The matter had otherwise been compromised between the parties and a petition bearing No.CRM-M-1697-2026 has been filed, wherein direction to record statements had been issued by order of even date. Charges have been framed on 24.10.2025, however, out of 24 prosecution witnesses, only 1 has been examined. The petitioners are not involved in any other case. 4.

The custody certificates along with status reports dated 14/13.01.2026, filed by the learned State counsel are taken on record. As per the same, the petitioners are behind bars for 6 months, 25 days & 7 months, 19 days respectively.

5.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioners of having obstructed the way of the complainant and snatching Rs.80,000/-. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage and the petitioners being not involved in any other case.

6.

Learned counsel for the complainant affirms the factum of compromise having been arrived at and has no objection for granting bail to the petitioners.

7.

Heard.

8.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioners are in custody for the last 6 months, 25 days & 7 months, 19 days respectively; not involved in any other case; compromise stands effected; charges were framed on 24.10.2025, however, out of 24 prosecution witnesses only 1 has been examined so far, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioners would be violative of their right

CRM-M-55734-2025 (O&M) 3 enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petitions are allowed.

9.

The petitioners are 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 petitioners will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

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

(iii) The petitioners will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, they are accused, or for commission of which they are suspected of.

(v) The petitioners 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 petitioners shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioners shall furnish their 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, they seek to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioners 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 petitioners.

10.

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 petitioners by this order.

CRM-M-55734-2025 (O&M) 4 11.

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. 12.
















  (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 15.01.2026 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No