IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 12.11.2025 Sandeep …Petitioner.

Versus State of Haryana …Respondent.

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY.

Present: Mr. J.C. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.

****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner, an accused in case FIR No. 321 dated 22.10.2020, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sector-29, Panipat, has filed the present 2^nd petition for grant of bail under Section 483 of BNSS.

2. Relevant facts as emerging from the documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:-

On 22.10.2020, after receiving a telephonic information regarding gunshots having been fired in the fields of village Dadola at Bapoli Road, ASI Shri Bhagwan along with his team reached at the crime spot and met complainant, who submitted a written complaint alleging therein that we are three brothers. All are living separately. My eldest brother is Sukhbir, I am the second and the youngest is Sompal. On 22.10.2020, at about 10 AM, my elder brother Sukhbir was working in his field whose field is adjacent to the fields of Sandeep, Satpal and Krishan while I was working in my adjoining field. On the said day, Sandeep, Satpal, Krishan and Krishan’s wife got into a heated arguments with my brother Sukhbir over the boundaries of the field. I went there and rescued my brother from them. Sandeep threatened that he would kill Sukhbir and left the spot, whereas Satpal, Krishan and his wife went towards the village. He along with his brother Sukhbir headed towards the village and when they reached near the fields of Satpal, Sandeep armed with weapons came in front of them while Satpal, Krishan and wife of Krishan caught hold of them, when suddenly Sandeep fired shots at Sukhbir, one of which hit him (Sukhbir) on right shoulder near chest, another hit below the heart and third one hit his right leg, who allegedly fell down and died at the spot. Thereafter, Sandeep and his family members fled away from the scene along with their weapons. With this backdrop, a formal case vide FIR No. 321 dated 22.10.2020, was registered against him, under Sections 302, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act, at Police Station Sector-29, Panipat.

Investigations were set into motion. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Blood was lifted from the spot and was taken in police possession. Post mortem was conducted on the dead body and the cause of death was opined to be “hemorrhage secondary to laceration of heart and right ling as result of fiream injury to the front of chest. All injuries were fresh antemortem and inflicted due to discharge of same firearm”.

During the course of investigation, on 22.10.2020, Sandeep was questioned and on finding incriminating material against him, he was arrested and also got demarcated the crime spot, got recovered pistol, motorcycle, 4 live rounds and license of pistol. During further investigation, however, accused Satpal, Krishan and Indro were found to be innocent. On completion of investigation, challan was filed in the trial Court on 20.11.2020 against accused Sandeep (present petitioner). Charges were framed on 9.11.2021.

Application filed by petitioner for grant of bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, vide order dated

14.8.2024. Aggrieved of the same, present petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The fact that the other three persons named in the FIR were found innocent by the Investigating Officer itself reflects upon the falsity of the case set up by the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that material witnesses have already been examined and as such the likelihood of petitioner overawing them is negligible. But even then possibility of completion of trial in the near future is