##PAGE1##

CRM-M-60498-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

(227) CRM-M-60498-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 04.02.2026

RAJ SINGH @ RAJ

... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Mr. Virender Ahlawat, Advocate for

Mr. Sudhir Rana, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana

**** (cid:1)

MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section

483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant

of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.190 dated 10.12.2024 registered

under Sections 310(4), 310(5), 310(6) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for

short “BNS”) and Section 29 of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Jatusana,

District Rewari.

2. As per the allegations, on 09/10.12.2024, a secret information was

received that 4-5 persons were present in a tubewell room on the kacha rasta of

Village Berli to Dehlawas. They were armed with weapons and they were

planning to commit some offence of dacoity. It was also informed that they

could be apprehended, if raid was conducted immediately. Believing the secret

AMIT SHARMA

2026.02.05 10:49

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this order/judgment.

CRM-M-60498-2025 (O&M) 2

information to be true, a raiding party was formed which reached at the

informed place and apprehended the petitioner and the co-accused. Recovery of

01 countrymade pistol, 02 live cartridges and 01 torch was effected from the

petitioner, whereas recovery of illicit arms and ammunitions were recovered

from the co-accused as well. The arms and ammunitions were taken into

custody. Investigation now stands completed.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been

falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody for a period of more than one

year. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as only 01 out of 12

prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. There are no chances of his

intimidating the witnesses since they are police officials. No useful purpose

would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. His involvement in other

cases cannot be a ground to deny benefit of bail to him. The co-accused has

already been extended benefit of regular bail. On parity, he too deserves to be

extended the same benefit. It is thus argued that he deserves to be released on

bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status

report has vehemently argued that the petitioner is a habitual offender as he is

involved in other 03 other cases of serious nature. There are chances of his

absconding or committing similar offences, if extended benefit of bail. It is,

therefore, argued that he does not deserve to be extended the benefit of bail.

5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by both the

parties.

AMIT SHARMA

2026.02.05 10:49

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this order/judgment.

CRM-M-60498-2025 (O&M) 3

6. The petitioner in connivance with the co-accused is alleged to have

hatched a conspiracy to commit the offence of dacoity as on 09/10.12.2024.

Recovery of some weapons had also been effected from him. It is only on the

basis of thorough assessment of the evidence to be adduced during trial that any

conclusion as to the fact that whether actually some conspiracy to commit

offence of dacoity was hatched, is to be drawn but not at this stage. The

petitioner is in custody for over a period of one year. His continued detention

would not serve any useful purpose. The chances of conclusion of trial in the

near future are bleak. His involvement in other cases cannot be considered to be

a reason for denying benefit of bail to him. It is well settled proposition of law

that bail is the rule and jail is an exception that even otherwise pre-trial

incarceration shall not be the replica of post-conviction sentencing. Taking into

consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the opinion that a case is

made out for grant of bail to the petitio