← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/66016/2025disposed of

Anil Mohan Bhardwaj v. State Of Haryana

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Subhas Mehla2 pages



-1-   

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 

 Decided on: 10.02.2026

 

  

......Petitioner Versus     

......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

Present:

Mr. Gurbinder S. Sidhu, Advocate for     Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana.

**** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

This is the third petition which has been filed under Section of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), (corresponding to Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.256 dated 08.05.2023 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station Industrial Sector 29, Panipat.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the present petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 years, the challan has been presented and subsequently, charges have been framed; earlier, regular bail petitions were dismissed as withdrawn before the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 29.08.2024 (Annexure P-6) and 04.07.2025 (Annexure P-7) passed in CRM-M-31831-2024 & CRM-M31531-2025, respectively. Hence, limited his prayer for directions to the trial Court to conclude the proceedings in a time bound manner. 3.

Notice of motion.

SONIA PURI 2026.02.23 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document



-2-    4.

In pursuance of advance notice, Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, AAG, Haryana, has put in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposes the prayer made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner while submitting that earlier he has approached this Court twice for grant of regular bail but this Court was not inclined to grant the relief of regular bail to the petitioner, hence, the said petitions were dismissed as withdrawn. It is further contended that the petitioner is an habitual offender who is involved in 05 more cases of similar nature and in the present case, he has forged and fabricated the appointment letter pertaining to Indian Army and on verification from the quarters concerned, the same was found to be fake. 5.

Heard.

6.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstance of the present case, this Court does not find merit in the present petition seeking regular bail to the petitioner; however considering that the present petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 years, as such, without commenting on the merits of the present case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of 03 months from the next date of hearing.

(SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 10.02.2026 Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO  Whether Reportable:

YES/NO SONIA PURI 2026.02.23 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document