IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

249 CRM-M-66834-2025 (O&M)

Decided on : 13.01.2026 Punit Sharma ...... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM :

***

Present : Ms. Sakshi Khera, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, DAG, Haryana for the respondent-State.

*** , J (ORAL)

CRM-47795-2025 Application is allowed as prayed for.

CRM-M-66834-2025

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.588 dated 28.09.2019, registered under Sections 148, 149, 109, 120-B, 364, 302 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Sector 10-A, Gurugram.

2. As per prosecution story, on 27.09.2019, petitioner alongwith co- accused kidnapped Sanjeev, (cousin of the complainant) due to some previous enmity and lateron he was found dead. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said offence. He further contends that neither the petitioner was present at the spot nor was named in the FIR. Learned counsel further contends that he has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of disclosure statement of co- accused. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of co-accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Learned counsel contends that co-accused of the petitioner namely Ansul, Chander Shekhar @ Shekhar, Ajay son of Late Shri Rajesh, Ajay alias Maya son of Sh. Ran Singh and Rahul @ Rahul Kataria have already been granted the concession of regular bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram as well as by this Court vide orders dated 02.11.2023, 11.09.2023, 02.09.2023, 01.09.2023 and 22.11.2022 respectively. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. He has been in custody in present case for more than four years. The petitioner was granted the concession of regular bail by trial Court on 19.01.2023, however, his bail was cancelled as he failed to appear on one date He has been in custody in present case for more than 04 years. The investigation in the case is complete, challan stands presented; charges have been framed out of 30 only 12 witnesses have been examined so far and as such, the trial will take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind bars. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Learned State counsel, who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. She has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature and if the petitioner is released on bail, he may abscond, tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses. She further submits that the petitioner is involved in multiple other cases meaning thereby he is a habitual offender.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than 04 years 06 months and 26 days; investigation is complete; challan stands presented, charges have been framed; out of 30 only 12 witnesses has been examined so far, co-accused Ansul, Chander Shekhar @ Shekhar, Ajay son of Late Shri Rajesh, Ajay alias Maya son of Sh. Ran Singh and Rahul @ Rahul Kataria have already been granted the concession of regular bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram as well as by this Court and the trial is proceeding at snail’s pace, no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in further custody. Keeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the