Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/10112/2026 of ANAND SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 27 August 2026
(O & M) ::1:: (213) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10112-2026 (O & M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2026 Anand Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Ms. Vandana Rana, Advocate and
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.
::1::
(213) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-10112-2026 (O & M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2026 Anand Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Ms. Vandana Rana, Advocate and Mr. T.C. Dhanwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. T.P. Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.582 dated 28.07.2025 under Sections 309(6) of BNS, 2023 (with Section 238(c) and 311 BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Hisar Sadar, District Hisar.
2. The FIR in the present case came to be registered at the instance of Amit and reads as under:- “Statement of Amit s/o Ved Singh r/o Harikot, District Hisar aged 23 years phone no. 9352098998 education 10th have stated that I am resident of the above-mentioned address and I work as a flipkart delivery boy in Hisar. On 25.07.2025 at about 12/01 PM, I was going from Hisar to deliver the goods, I had to delivered the parcel (03) to Dhiranwas and when I reached Patan Road from Rawalwas Khurd to deliver his parcel, I stopped my motorcycle with my luggage and there a boy already standing on the road aged about 25/30 years. He said that these are my parcel which belonged to
::2:: Satyaveer, Raveena and Ramesh. When I started looking for the parcels, meanwhile that boy hit me on the head from behind with some heavy object due to which I fell down and that boy snatched my bag and ran away on his motorcycle. There were some parcels (written) and about three thousand rupees in my bag. I got a lot of injury on my head, even then I got up courageously and took my motorcycle and reached near Rawalwas Khurd Station, there I felt dizzy and I stopped the motorcycle and I fainted, then passerby took me to the hospital and now I am getting my treatment done at Aadhar Hospital, Hisar. I request you to take legal action against, the boy whose name and address I do not know. Statement written and heard correctly. SD/- AJAY, SD/- AMIT.”
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the FIR but has been nominated as an accused later. As the petitioner is a first time offender, is in custody since 04.08.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of regular bail.
4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that the petitioner is the sole accused having inflicted an injury attracting Section 307 IPC (Section 109 BNS) on the head of the complainant. He has been duly identified in the Test Identification Parade in the presence of a Magistrate. The nature of allegations levelled against and the evidence in support thereof, does not entitle him to the concession as prayed for. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 04.08.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.
::3::
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 04.08.2025 but only 02 of the 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial in the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation, the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required.
7. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Anand Singh is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
8. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that he is not involved in any other case/crime other than the case(s) referred to in this order.
9. If any attempt whatsoever is made by the petitioner and/or his family members/friends to contact/threaten/intimidate any of the witnesses of the present occurrence, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.
10. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from Trial without sufficient cause.
11. The petition stands disposed of.
::4::
12. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE August 27, 2026 vishal Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable :- Yes/No