IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

240 CRM-M-53350-2025 Decided on : 03.12.2025 Sahil @ Papli ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Mandeep Singla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amish Sharma, Asst. A.G., Haryana.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1. Instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name of FIR Date Section(s) Police District Petitioner(s) No. Station Sahil @ 01 02.01.2021 302, 323, 34, 216 Sadar Rewari Papli (Sections 148 and149 Rewari IPC were deleted and Sections 216, 34 IPC were added later on)

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is in custody since 04.01.2021, amounting to a period of approximately 4 years and 10 months.

3. While addressing the arguments on facts, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR was lodged at the instance of Jaswant Singh (father of the deceased), who received information about the incident from the eye-witnesses, namely Suman Devi (mother of the deceased) and Mamta (wife of the deceased). As per the allegations contained in the FIR, accused persons—(1) Pawan, (2) Rohit, (3) Rahul, (4) Nikhil, (5) Sahil(petitioner herein), and (6) Ashish, allegedly assaulted the deceased, Amit, using bricks, lathis, and dandas.

4. It is further submitted that after completion of the investigation, accused Pawan and Nikhil were found to be innocent and were accordingly placed in Column No.2 of the final report. Counsel contends that case of the petitioner, as well as that of the remaining accused, cannot be distinguished from that of Pawan and Nikhil, as all were assigned a similar role in the commission of the alleged offence.

Even the application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed by learned trial Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the material witnesses, namely Suman Devi and Mamta, have already been examined as PW-9 and PW-8, respectively, on 14.05.2025. Although both witnesses have supported the prosecution’s case, counsel contends that role attributed to the petitioner in the FIR cannot be subsequently improved upon. However, the final determination of the petitioner’s role remains within the domain of the trial Court and is yet to be adjudicated at the final stage of the proceedings.

6. Primarily, counsel for the petitioner emphasizes that petitioner has been in custody for the period approximately 4 years and 10 months. Out of a total of 22 prosecution witnesses, only 10 have been examined so far, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time.

7. It is further submitted that the petitioner is neither an habitual offender nor a criminal, as no criminal case has ever been registered against him in the past.

8. For the purpose of claiming parity, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that another similarly situated accused, namely Ashish alias Ashu, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 22.05.2025, passed in CRM-M- 10893-2025 (Annexure P-10). Additionally, another co-accused, namely Rahul @ Mamu, who is also named in the FIR, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.11.2025, passed in CRM-M-62831-2025

9. In the light of overall submissions, including the prolonged incarceration of the petitioner, stage of trial, nature of allegations, absence of any recovery from the petitioner and the fact that co-accused has already been granted the concession of regular bail, counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.

10. Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of affidavit of Dr. Ravinder HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (HQ) Rewari, in Court today. Same is taken on record. Registry is d