IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

219 Date of decision: August 28, 2025 RAHUL @ BRAHAMCHARI ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. G.S. Chhina, AAG, Haryana. Mr. A.P. Bhandari, Advocate with Ms. Bhargavi, Advocate for the complainant.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.196 dated 21.07.2022 under Sections 302, 120-B, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25, 29 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Chhainsa, District Faridabad (Annexure P-1).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not named in the FIR in question, which is based on alleged eyewitness account. The petitioner came to be nominated subsequently on the basis of a disclosure statement purportedly suffered by co-accused Ajay. It has been asserted that the disclosure statement, on the basis of which the petitioner has been nominated as an accused, holds little evidentiary value and clearly points to his false implication in the present case. It has also been submitted that the complainant, while stepping into the witness box, had improved upon his earlier version inasmuch as initially he had alleged that there were 4 persons who had intercepted the deceased after coming out of a car and fired fatal shots on him, however, during trial, he stated that in fact, there were as many as 5 assailants, who participated in the crime in question. Learned counsel submits that in the circumstances, it clearly comes across that the petitioner is innocent. It has also been submitted that the petitioner had no motive to participate in the occurrence in question, much less fire towards the deceased as even the motive to eliminate the deceased lay with co-accused Ajay. Learned counsel has, therefore, prayed that in the aforementioned facts and circumstances, since the petitioner has been in custody for almost three years having been arrested on 28.07.2022, and 36 witnesses remain to be examined, the petitioner be admitted to bail as there is no possibility of the trial concluding in the near future.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite, and reiterated the allegations levelled in the FIR in question (Annexure P-1), which stands reproduced hereinunder:-

“To the SHO, Police Station Chhanysa, District Faridabad. Subject. Regarding the murder with conspiracy, Sir, I request that | Harendra S/oJeevan Singh resident of village Kakod, UP presently residing at village Changa, District Faridabad. My brother-in-law Rajkumar's house is at some distance from my living room. My brother-in-law Rajkumar and my sister Gayatri had gone on a pilgrimage to Mata Vaishno Devi. I am coming from my room to my brother-in-law's house today on 21.07.2022 at around 6.15 AM. there is a vacant plot next to it. Where my nephew Rahul's son of Rajkumar R/o Chhanysa, his friends Yogesh's son of Chaman and Lalit's son of Ashok residents Chhanysa were also sitting, then four boys came in a white colored car POLO and the driver was sitting on the seat and three boys came out from the car All three of them had pistol/revolver weapons in their hands who fired at Rahul in front of me. My nephew tried to run away but the three assailants pinned him down and shot him several times on head and body. I and the people of the neighborhood threw bricks and stones at these attackers, these people ran away sitting in their car POLO Volkswagen. After that I brought my nephew Rahul to the hospital with help of gathered person. Where the doctor declared my nephew Rahul dead. That my nephew has been killed by firing shots under some conspiracy. I did not know the people wh