208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Manjeet Singh ….Petitioner versus State of Haryana ….Respondent Date of decision: January 08, 2026 Date of Uploading: January 08, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Sushil Kumar Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar Thakur, Senior DAG Haryana.

**********

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.411 dated 26.09.2023, for the offence punishable under Sections 342, 365, 384 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 13(1)(b) & 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘PC Act’), registered at Police Station Sadar Sirsa.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that complainant, namely, Gurdeep Singh informed the police that on 26.09.2023, during daytime hours, he was travelling on a motorcycle along with his friend. At about 2:30–3:00 p.m., when they stopped by the roadside to ease themselves, three persons who were already hiding behind bushes suddenly approached them, forcibly dragged them to a distance of about 200–300 meters from the road, and snatched their mobile phones and wallets. The complainant stated ₹ ₹

that his wallet contained 5,000, while his friend’s wallet contained 2,500. Thereafter, the said persons threatened to falsely implicate them in a criminal case and also prepared a video. One of the accused was wearing a uniform, whereas the other two were in civil clothes, which, according to the complainant, was done deliberately. The accused then took them to a place ₹

about 2 kilometers away and demanded a sum of 10,000 to be transferred to their account. In compliance with their demand, the complainant ₹

transferred 5,000 through GPay after scanning a QR code, which reflected the name Manjeet Singh (petitioner herein). In addition, the accused took ₹ ₹

5,000 in cash from the complainant and 2,500 in cash from his friend, after which they released them. The complainant further stated that upon verification, he came to know the names of the accused as Kulvinder Singh, son of Kuldeep Singh, resident of Musahibwala; Manjeet Singh (petitioner herein), resident of village Beghu; and Deepak Kumar, resident of Kanganpur Road, Sirsa.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 21.02.2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has iterated that no TIP (Test Identification Parade) has been conducted by the police so as to connect the petitioner with the crime in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has been primarily implicated into the FIR in question on account of his antecedents. Learned counsel has further argued that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Kulwinder Singh has already been granted regular bail, by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 22.11.2023 passed in CRM-

M-56510-2023. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated

07.01.2026, in the Court today, which is taken on record.

5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 21.02.2025 and is in continuous custody since then. Investigation was carried out and challan has been presented on 27.04.2025. Total 18 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is not in dispute before this Court that none prosecution witness has been examined till date. It is thus, indubitable that conclusion of the trial will take long time.

6.1. At this juncture