CRM-M/40639/2026 of SADRUDDIN @ SADAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 13 August 2026

CRM-M-40639-2026 -1- 223 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40639-2026

Date of Decision: 13.08.2026 SADRUDDIN @ SADAR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Munfaid Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.396 dated 14.05.2019 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 452, 364 and 302 of the IPC, 1860 (corresponding Sections 191(3), 190, 115(2), 333, 140 and 103 of BNS) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sadar Nuh, District Nuh.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was initially granted the concession of regular bail but on account of noting down a wrong date, he was unable to appear on 25.08.2022. Later, he was arrested in the present case on 23.02.2023 and since then, he is in custody. The similarly situated co-accused namely Imran has been granted the concession of bail, vide order dated 19.07.2021 passed by this Court. As the petitioner is now in custody for the last approximately three and a half years and has not been attributed any injury, he be granted the concession of KUSUM

CRM-M-40639-2026 -2- bail, particularly when only 07 of the 15 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.

3. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has filed a reply dated 11.08.2026 by way of an affidavit of Y.V.R. Sashi Sekhar, IPS, Additiional Superintendent of Police, Nuh, which is taken on record. While referring the said reply, he contends that the petitioner was also present at the spot and had prevented the deceased from being taken away by the complainant party. He, however, concedes that the petitioner was initially granted the concession of regular bail, that he is in custody since 23.02.2023, but only 07 of the 15 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, and that a co-accused namely Imran has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 19.07.2021.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and his co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 23.02.2023 but only 07 of the 15 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required moreso when a co- accused namely Imran has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 19.07.2021.

6. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and petitioner-Sadrudding @ Sadar S/o Ali Mohammad is KUSUM

CRM-M-40639-2026 -3- ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

7. The petitioner shall appear on the first Monday of every month before the police station concerned till the conclusion of the trial and furnish an affidavit each time that he is not involved in any other case other than the present case.

8. In addition, the petitioner (or someone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- 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.

9. If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any at- tempt to contact/threaten/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

10. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 13.08.2026 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No KUSUM