CRM-M/38044/2026 of AMIT KHATRI @ SETHI Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 20 July 2026

1. dated 17.12. 324(4), 351( Station, Civ 117(2) and 1 is the first pe

2. the Court to and beaten u depose again

3. not named in 044-2026 (O&M) THE HIGH COURT OF PUN

i @ Sethi

Versus ryana

n’ble Mrs. Justice Shalini Singh Mr. Bijender Dhankhar, Advoca for the petitioner.

Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, DAG, Ha

*** INGH NAGPAL J. Petitioner seeks regular bail in c 2025 under Sections 115, 112 3), 61(2) and 111(2)(a) Bharatiy vil Line, District Sonipat, Har 11(2)(a) BNS were added in the etition for regular bail. It is alleged that on 17.12.2025, depose against the co-accused up by approximately 5/6 perso nst the said co-accused namely A Learned counsel for the petitio n the FIR. His name figured in

NJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-38044-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.07.2026

…Petitioner

…Respondent h Nagpal ate aryana. case arising out of FIR No. 370 2(2), 126, 190, 191(3), 232(1), ya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police ryana. Offence under Sections e FIR during investigation. This when complainant was going to namely Ankit, he was stopped ons and was threatened not to Ankit, who was facing trial. oner submits that petitioner was the disclosure statement of co-

, e s s o d o s - KAPIL

accused. No custody sinc Sitender sim Court vide or was complet complainant offence. He the offence Petitioner, w bail.

4. on the groun indicating hi therefore, dis Sitender.

5. accused on Siddhu and S by this Court M-29508-202 06.06.2026 i completed a jurisdictional sufficient rea on the ground 044-2026 (O&M) recovery was effected from him ce 06.06.2026. Co-accused nam milarly placed, had already bee rder dated 27.05.2026 and 06.07 te and challan was presented were simple in nature. Petitione further submits that Section 111 allegedly committed did not r who had clean antecedents, dese Learned State counsel has oppo d that danda had been recovered is involvement in the commiss stinguishable from that of co-ac Petitioner is not named in the F disclosure statement of co-accu Sitender similarly placed, have t vide order dated 27.05.2026 an 26 and CRM-M-33927-2026. i.e. for the last 01 month and and challan has been presen l Magistrate. Mere involvem ason to refuse bail. Petitioner is d parity.

m. Further, that petitioner was in mely Siddharth @ Siddhu and en allowed regular bail by this 7.2026. Investigation of the case . All injuries suffered by the er was not involved in any other 1(2)(a) was wrongly invoked as result in death of any person. erved to be enlarged on regular osed the prayer for regular bail d at the instance of the petitioner ion of offence. His case was, ccused Siddharth @ Siddhu and FIR. He has been nominated as used. Co-accused Siddharth @ since been allowed regular bail nd 06.07.2026, passed in CRM- Petitioner is in custody w.e.f. d 11 days. Investigation stands nted in the Court of learned ment in one other case, is not entitled to grant of regular bail n d s e e r s . r l r , d s @ l - . s d t l KAPIL

6. case, petition furnishing ad Court/Duty M

7. 20.07.2026 Kapil

044-2026 (O&M) The petition is allowed. Witho ner is ordered to be released dequate bail and surety bonds to Magistrate Pending CRM(s), if any, are also

Whether speaking/reas

Whether reportable ut a comment on merits of the on regular bail subject to his o the satisfaction of learned trial o disposed of accordingly. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL)

JUDGE soned Yes/No

Yes/No e s l ) KAPIL