Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/18579/2026 of AMIT @ AMIT JHINJHANIA Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 16 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 226 CRM-M-18579-2026 Date of Decision:16.07.2026 AMIT @ AMIT JHINJHANIA ....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL. Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. GREWAL, J.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision:16.07.2026
AMIT @ AMIT JHINJHANIA
....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
.....RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL.
Present:
Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
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. This petition has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S, 2023 (Corresponding to Section 439 CrPC) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.731 Dated 30.12.2023 under Sections 148 (Corresponding to Section 191
(3) BNS 2023), 149 (Corresponding to Section 190 BNS 2023), 212 (Corresponding to Section 249 BNS 2023), 302 (Corresponding to Section 103 BNS 2023) 459 IPC (Corresponding to Section 331 BNS 2023) and Sections 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, 1959 lodged at Police Station Sector 32-33, Karnal, District Karnal (Annexure P-1).
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the present FIR was registered on the basis of the statement made by the complainant, Kanwarpal, a resident of Gali No. 1, Uttam Nagar Colony, Karnal. The complainant stated that on 29.12.2023 at about 6:40 p.m., his son Sonu was sitting at his shop situated at their residence. At that time, around 10–15 boys were allegedly fighting amongst themselves and pelting stones at each other in the street. On noticing the commotion, Sonu came out of his shop RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh and asked them why they were fighting, whereafter he returned to his shop. Thereafter, all the said boys entered the complainant's premises, surrounded Sonu and started assaulting him. One of the assailants allegedly inflicted three knife blows upon Sonu. Thereafter, the assailants dragged him into the street and continued to inflict multiple injuries upon him. At the time of the occurrence, the complainant's wife, his sister's sons and other neighbours reached the spot. On seeing them, all the assailants fled from the scene on their respective motorcycles along with their weapons. The injured Sonu was immediately taken to Civil Hospital, Karnal, where he was declared brought dead by the attending doctor.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and other co-accused have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 05.01.2024 and the trial is likely to take time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, it is prayed that the petitioner be enlarged on regular bail during the pendency of the trial.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which are taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years 06 months and 08 RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh days and is not involved in any other case. He further submits that one witness has partly been examined.
6. I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.
7. After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 years 06 months and 08 days; is not involved in any other case; co-accused has been garnted concession of regular bail and only one witness has partly been exmained so far 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.
8. 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.
9. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
10. 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.
(H.S.GREWAL) 16.07.2026
JUDGE renu
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT
Chandigarh