← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/68878/2025allowed

Mohd Mehraj Alias Raja Alias Md Mehraz v. State Of Haryana

2025-12-11Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary3 pages

 CRM-M-68878-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-68878-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.12.2025 Mohd. Mehraj alias Raja alias Md. Mehraz ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

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

Mr. Munfaid Khan, Advocate for the petitioner  

  

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.564 dated 20.09.2022, under Sections 323, 506 and 34 IPC (Sections 302 and 201 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Palla, District Faridabad. 2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 3 years and about 3 months. Co-accused Mohd. Ibrar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2025, Annexure P-2 after being in custody for 3 years about 1 month. Co-accused namely Babu Khan and Raju Verma have been declared innocent and application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., for summoning them also stands dismissed by the trial Court on 10.01.2025. The complainant, who is the eye witness, had partly examined on 10.01.2025 but is not coming forward for his cross-examination and he along with other material witnesses summoned by bailable warrants but for last 7 hearings, they did not come forward. One material witness Shankar was examined as PW-4 and did not support the version of the prosecution. Otherwise, there are 28 witnesses

 CRM-M-68878-2025 (O&M) 2 remain to be examined. The petitioner is not involved in any other case. 3.

The custody certificate dated 09.12.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 3 years, 2 months and 19 days.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having given saria blow to the deceased. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage, co-accused having been granted bail and the petitioner being not involved in any other case.

5.

Heard.

6.



  

  

 



   



    !" # $ $ 

# %

&  # '()

  &*  

      &   

     

&$

$ 

 !  +

  

  7.

The petitioner is 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 petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

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

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

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to

 CRM-M-68878-2025 (O&M) 3 the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

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

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his 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, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner 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 petitioner.

8.

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 petitioner by this order.

9.

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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 11.12.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No