IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

228 Date of decision: 14.01.2026 Vipin Kumar ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Johan Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Astt. AG, Haryana.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The instant first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.309 dated 04.12.2024 registered under Sections 109(1), 132, 221 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station BPTP, Faridabad, District Faridabad.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that on 04.12.2024, ASI Sandeep Singh along with HC Sube Singh, Constable Sunil, Constable Manjit and SPO Ram Kishan, driver of the government vehicle, were present at ‘Master Road' in connection with crime detection and patrolling duty.Information was received from the Police Control Room, Faridabad, that the team of Crime Branch, Sector 85,had an encounter with a man. On receipt of said information, ASI Sandeep Singh, along with his colleagues, reached near Godraj Society, Sector 78, ВРТР. Faridabad. SI Mahender Singh presented a written complaint stating therein that on 04.12.2024, he, along with his colleague HC Sandeep Singh, Constable Harkesh, Constable Sanjay, Constable Sikander and Constable Navneet, driver of the government vehicle Bolero, was present at 'Chandela Chowk’ in connection with crime detection and patrolling duty. An informer informed SI Mahender that a man, namely, Vipin, resident of K.L.J. Society, Sector 77, Faridabad, along with his associates, had committed several crimes in recent times. The informer further revealed that Vipin was carrying an illegal weapon and was going to village Bhatola in a Mahindra SUV to commit a crime. Thereafter, SI Mahender saw that a Mahindra SUV 500 bearing registration No. UP 14CP 0029 had been going at high speed and he directed his driver to chase the said vehicle. The driver of the Mahindra SUV tried to hit the Police Vehicle but he stopped near a rainy drain. He then stepped down from his car and opened fire on the police officials with the intention of killing them. However, the police party overpowered him and he received a bullet injury in the right foot. Subsequently, crime scene photographer Shyam and higher police officials were called to the spot and videography of the place of the incident was conducted. The apprehended person revealed his identity as Vipin Kumar (petitioner herein) and a .315 bore pistol was recovered from him. The present FIR thus came to be registered against the petitioner for obstructing government officials, opening fire upon a police party and possessing an illegal weapon.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner refers to the final report submitted by the police in the present case wherein it has been mentioned that the pistol recovered from the petitioner could not be opened. He contends that it is highly suspicious that the petitioner could have fired at the police party. He further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 04.12.2024 and has already undergone an actual custody of more than 01 year. He further contends that only 01 out of 20 witnesses has been examined so far. The trial is thus likely to take long. He further contends that even though the petitioner sustained an injury on his knee in the alleged exchange of fire, however, none of the members of the police party has received any injury, thus rendering the prosecution version doubtful.

4. State counsel on instructions from ASI Subay Singh/3137/FBD contends that the petitioner had opened fire at the police party. She further contends that the petitioner is a history-sheeter and is involved in many cases. She further contends that even though it has been recorded in the final report that the pistol could not be opened, th