Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/35502/2026 of SRINIWASH ALIAS SRINIWASH KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 2 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Sriniwash @ Sriniwash Kumar State of Haryana Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Uploading:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35502
35502-
IN T IN T IN T IN T Sriniwash @ State of Hary Date of Deci Date of Deci Date of Deci Date of Deci Date of Uplo Date of Uplo Date of Uplo Date of Uplo
CORAM:
CORAM:
CORAM:
CORAM:
Present: Present: Present: Present:-
SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO
2023 (Sectio in case beari punishable u 238 of the Gurugram.
2.
3. is in custody petitioner ha counsel has f was not carr
HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGAR CHANDIGAR CHANDIGAR CHANDIGAR
CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35502
35502-2
Sriniwash Kumar Versus yana ision: sion: ision: sion: September September September September 02
02, 2026
oading: oading: oading: oading: September 02 September 02 September 02 September 02, 2026
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Se ***** ***** ***** *****
OEL OEL OEL OEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed u n 439 of Cr. P.C.) seeking grant ing FIR No.352 dated 27.05.20 under Sections 3(5), 309(6) of th BNS, 2023 added later on), The FIR in question pertains to s Learned counsel for the petition y since 30.05.2025. Learned cou as been falsely implicated into further submitted that requisite T ried out by the police. Learned
B AND HARYANA B AND HARYANA B AND HARYANA B AND HARYANA AT AT AT AT RH RH RH RH
….Petitioner ….Respondent MEET GOEL MEET GOEL MEET GOEL MEET GOEL the petitioner. enior DAG Haryana. under Section 483 of the BNSS, t of regular bail to the petitioner, 025, registered for the offences he BNS, 2023 (Sections 111(2), at Police Station Sector-10A, snatching and assaulting. er has iterated that the petitioner unsel has further argued that the the FIR in question. Learned TIP (Test Identification Parade) d counsel has iterated that FIR- r t
, , s , , r e d ) - MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35502
35502-2026
complainant stands examined as prosecution witness. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated 25.08.2026, in Court today, which is taken on record.
5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.
6. The petitioner was arrested on 30.05.2025, whereinafter, investigation was carried out and the challan qua the petitioner has been presented on 25.07.2025. Total 14 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which, 03 have been examined till date. It is thus, indubitable, that conclusion of the trial will take long. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.
6.1. As per the custody certificate dated 25.08.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 01 year, 02 months and 26 days.
6.2. Further, as per the said custody certificate, the petitioner is stated to be involved in other FIR(s). However, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35502
35502-2026
petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586 and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 RCR (Criminal) 477 RCR (Criminal) 477 RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191.
Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the factual milieu of the case.
7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed allowed allowed allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.
(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.
MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35502
35502-2026
8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
9. Ordered accordingly.
10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off.
(SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 02 September 02 September 02 September 02, 2026
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable:
Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.02 18:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment