Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/35155/2026 of MONU BHATI Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 8 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222 CRM-M-35155-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2026 MONU BHATI ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA .…Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Deepender Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate,
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: 08.07.2026
MONU BHATI
....Petitioner
V/s
STATE OF HARYANA
.…Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present: Mr. Deepender Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dharamvir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana.
*** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the ‘BNSS’) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.171 dated 19.03.2026 registered under Sections 123 of BNS (offence under Section 238 of BNS, 2023 added subsequently) at Police Station Sector 58, District Faridabad.
2. Custody certificate dated 07.07.2026 filed by learned State counsel in Court today is taken on record.
3. On a complaint made by one Aarti, the instant FIR was registered, the translated version of which is as under:- “Police Station Sector 58 District Faridabad; statement of Aarti, daughter of Shri Prempal, resident of village Asavati, Police Station Gadpuri, District Palwal, aged 26 years, 8744460944. Stated that I am a resident of the aforementioned address and I teach the LKG class at MRK School in village Khandawli. I had a friendship for about 8 years with Monu Bhati, son of Prem Raj, MANI KUMAR
resident of Anchepur, Noida, UP. We used to talk to each other over the phone continuously. In January 2026, my engagement was fixed in Village Chandpur, District Faridabad; when Monu came to know about this matter, Monu came today, dated 19.03.2026, at around 01:00 PM to the school in village Khandawli, then we talked to each other regarding the engagement, then we both left the school and came near Devaansh Garden in village Kaili sitting in Monu's car, and there we started talking to each other and Monu and I talked here for about 10/15 minutes. Thereafter, Monu took out a packet containing poison from his car and said, "Since we are not getting married to each other, I will die." Monu then gave me some poisonous powder and both Monu and I consumed the poison. Monu had forcibly given me the poison to consume. I had told him that my engagement had already taken place and that he should not remain in contact with me. After some time, the health of both of us started deteriorating, Monu himself brought me in his car to Sarvodaya Hospital, where both Monu and I are undergoing treatment. I am giving this statement in my full senses and without any pressure.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that he and the complainant were in a relationship and since the complainant had got engaged elsewhere both had decided to end their lives, as a result of which, they consumed poison. Learned counsel submits that only with a view to save her skin, the complainant at a later stage gave a statement that the petitioner had forcibly given poison to her. Learned counsel while referring to the FIR, submits that the contents of the FIR are contradictory because in the first breath the complainant stated that both had consumed poison and in the next breath she stated that the petitioner had forcibly given poison to her. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2026; final report stands submitted; framing of charges and trial will take a sufficiently long time, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. MANI KUMAR
5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application, stating that if the petitioner is released on bail, he may try to influence and threaten the witnesses.
6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
7. Concededly, it is a case where the petitioner and the complainant were in a relationship. They consumed poison since the complainant had been engaged elsewhere. As to whether the petitioner have actually committed the offence of forcibly giving poison to the complainant or not, shall be determined at the stage of trial. The petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2026; trial will take a sufficiently long time and in the considered opinion of this Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.
8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)
JUDGE July 08, 2026 Mani Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No
Whether reportable:
Yes/No MANI KUMAR