SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 26846

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VISHNU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent



##PAGE1##

CRM-M-69505-2025 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

(237) CRM-M-69505-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 04.02.2026

VISHNU ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Mr. Amit Pruthi, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana

**** (cid:1)

MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant one is the second petition preferred 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.114 dated

10.05.2024 registered under Sections 386, 506, 120B of IPC and Section 25(1-

B)a, 25(6), 25(1) and 29(B) of Arms Act at Police Station Farukhnagar, District

Gurugram.

2. As per the allegations, on 10.05.2024, ASI Sanjay Kumar, posted at

the aforementioned police station, received a secret information that some

members of Lawrence Bishnoi gang, namely Rohit Godara, Naveen Boxer,

Lipan Nehra and Pawan Nehra, were active in the city of Gurugram for extorting

money from businessmen and rich people, the main members of the group were

operating from foreign countries, some of them were lodged in jails and all of

them were into contact with each other through different social media apps. It

was also informed that they had even got murdered one businessman Sachin

AMIT SHARMA

2026.02.05 16:39

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this order/judgment.

##PAGE2##

CRM-M-69505-2025 2

Goda in Rohtak. One of the members of this gang namely Rohit Godara had

raised demand of ransom money of Rs.2 crores from owner of Maniram Grocery

Store, Gurugram. It was informed that if the above mentioned persons and other

members of the gang were apprehended and interrogated, huge quantity of

contraband, ransom money and weapons could be recovered from them. On the

basis of this information, the aforementioned FIR was registered. Investigation

proceedings were initiated. During investigation, accused Dinesh @ Dinu was

arrested on 10.05.2024. Recovery of two mobile phones, one .30 bore

countrymade pistol alongwith five live cartridges was effected from him. On his

identification, co-accused Jagdish @ Jaggu, Pardeep, Sagar and the present

petitioner were arrested on 12.05.2024. Recovery of one .30 bore pistol and 05

live cartridges and 01 Honda City vehicle which was used in the crime, had been

effected from the petitioner. Subsequently, other accused were arrested.

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 since 12.05.2024. He was not

named in the FIR and has been involved in this case on the basis of disclosure

statement of the co-accused Dinesh @ Dinu which cannot be considered to be

admissible in evidence. Most of the co-accused have already been extended

benefit of bail. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the same benefit. He

does not have any criminal antecedents. No useful purpose would be served by

detaining him in custody anymore. It is, therefore, stressed that the petitioner

deserves to be extended the benefit of bail.

AMIT SHARMA

2026.02.05 16:39

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this order/judgment.

##PAGE3##

CRM-M-69505-2025 3

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently argued that the

petitioner is a member of a gang operated by Lawrence Bishnoi, which was

involved in extorting money from businessmen and professionals by extending

threats to them. The petitioner was actively involved with the said gang and had

facilitated purchase of Honda City vehicle, on the asking of the co-accused

Rohit Godara and had also facilitated obtaining of arms and ammunitions to

other members of the gang. Recovery of arms has been effected from him.

Some of the co-accused are still to be arrested in the case. There are chances of

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

therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5. This Court has heard the rival s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top