CRM-M/16700/2026 of JASBIR @DEEPAK Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 27 July 2026

1. This petition has been filed under section 483 B.N.S.S. (earlier 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 262 dated 20.09.2025 under Sections 103(1), 190,191(3), 324(4), 351(2), 61 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 302,149,148,427,506,120-B of IPC) registered at Police Station Badli, District Jhajjar.

2. The case of the prosecution is that co-accused Vikas and Ajay hatched a conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased, namely Karambir. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, they, along with other accused, chased the car of the deceased and, after forcing him to alight from his car at Village RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh

Ladpur, caused injuries to him with dandas and bitas. On 22.09.2025, the statements of both the accused, namely Vikas and Ajay, were recorded, wherein the petitioner was not named. Subsequently, on 25.09.2025, the petitioner was named as one of the persons who had accompanied them. However, no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not named in the present case and has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co-accused. He further submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged and no specific role has been attributed to him. It is further argued that PW-1 Jai Parkash (complainant) has not supported the case of the prosecution and has failed to identify the petitioner in Court. The petitioner is in custody since 06.11.2025 and prays for grant of regular bail.

4. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 08 months and 20 days and is involved in two more cases however he has been released on bail in those cases.

5. I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

6. After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 08 months and 20 days; although he is involved in two other cases, he has been released on bail therein; apart from the RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh disclosure statement, there is no other evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

9. It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 27.07.2026

(H.S.GREWAL) renu

JUDGE Whethber speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh