213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 07.04.2026 Vinit ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Ms Sakshi Khera, Advocate, for the petitioner (through VC).

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.04 dated 10.01.2025, registered under Sections 109(1), 221, 132 and 317(2) BNS, 2023 and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station Bhupani, District Faridabad.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that police party while on patrolling received a secret information to the effect that Virender and Vineet (present petitioner) would be coming on their motorcycle and they could be arrested along with contraband. Barricading was laid by police party at the place as disclosed and two persons were seen coming on a motorcycle from the side of village Jasana. On signalling to stop, the rider of motorcycle increased its speed, turned left and tried to flee away, however, both of them fell down and started running on foot. The rider of motorcycle shouted “maar maar” whereupon the person riding pillion fired gunshot at the police party. Thereafter, police official took out his service revolver and fired one shot in the air and the other towards the accused. The bullet hit that person in the leg due to which he fell down on the ground whereas the rider of motorcycle succeeded in fleeing away from the spot. On asking, the injured person disclosed his name to be Vineet (petitioner) and a 315 bore country made pistol was seen lying near him. He failed to produce licence regarding the same. Thus, FIR got registered and he was arrested on the spot. On completion of investigation, the challan was presented and the on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court finding no merit in the same, dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 18.12.2025. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court praying for grant of bail by way of filing the present petition

3. It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has submitted that on the basis of secret information, petitioner has been roped in the present case. She further submits that petitioner is alleged to have fired upon the police party which is without any basis as there is no injury attributed to him as well as there is no fire arm injury on any police party. To buttress her arguments, she has submitted that it is the petitioner who has suffered bullet injury from the police party. She has further submitted that in a preplanned manner, petitioner has been roped in the present case. She further submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in four other cases, however, he is on bail in those cases. Petitioner is behind the bars for last more than one year and no prosecution witness has been examined till date, thus, the right of fair trial has been defeated. She, thus, submits that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by learned Counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that petitioner was specifically named in the secret information and he opened fire on the police party and in retaliation, police fired and the petitioner suffered bullet injury on his leg. On instructions, he submits that out of total 25 prosecution witnesses, none has been been examined so far. He has placed on record the custody certificate of the petitioner.

5. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that though, the petitioner is alleged to hav