Rambir v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 04.12.2025 RAMBIR ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 274 dated 04.09.2025 under Sections 55,61,3(5) and 25(1B) (a) added later on of the BNS registered at Police Station, Sadar, Jhajjar.

2.

It is alleged against the present petitioner that he entered into a criminal conspiracy to kill the complainant, Rohit, and procured weapons in the form of country-made pistols. The prosecution further alleges that the petitioner supplied one such pistol along with two live cartridges to co-accused Suresh, which have already been recovered from his possession during investigation. It is also alleged that co-accused Abhishek @ Sonu, acting in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy along with the petitioner and co-accused Suresh installed a GPS tracking device in the complainant's Scorpio-N vehicle. Additionally, the petitioner, in connivance with the other co-accused, is alleged to have extended threats to the complainant with intent to cause his death.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he has no role in the alleged offence at any stage. It is argued that the petitioner is being made a scapegoat, and the only allegation attributed to him is that he allegedly provided a GPS device, which by itself does not connect him with the commission of the alleged offence.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Pradeep Chokker, Advocate appears and has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer made by the ld. counsel for the petitioner.

6.

Mr. Ashwani Bhatia, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposes the bail application on the ground that the petitioner has been named in the FIR and he has actively participated in the alleged offence. Learned State counsel has filed a reply in Court, which is taken on record. He further submits that the petitioner is required for the proper and thorough investigation of the present case, including effecting recovery of the weapons and obtaining information regarding the source from which the country-made pistols and two live cartridges were procured. He further submits that the petitioner is involved in 17 other FIRs out of which one FIR No. 357 of 2017 is registered under the Gangster Act.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner is on bail in most of the FIR's.

6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties this Court observes that the allegations levelled against the petitioner pertain to serious offences, including criminal conspiracy and attempt to commit murder. The presence of the petitioner is considered necessary for the purpose of effective investigation, including the recovery of incriminating weapons and tracing the source of procurement of firearms and cartridges. Furthermore, the petitioner's involvement in multiple FIRs, including one registered under the provisions of the Gangsters Act, prima facie indicates a pattern of criminal conduct and raises apprehension of possible interference in the investigation.

7.

In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail at this stage.


      



04.12.2025 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No