Alok Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Alok Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of the petitioner on regular bail subject to furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned; pending application(s), if any, disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arrested in connection with FIR No. 309 dated 09.11.2024 registered under Sections 140(3), 310(2), 238(a), 61(b) of BNS at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, is entitled to be granted regular bail.

Court's answer

Petition allowed: the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned; the Court took into consideration the discussed facts expressly without making any comment on the merits of the case, lest they prejudice the case of the prosecution/petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

Parity ground for bail: co-accused Arun, Vikas and Dinesh had already been extended the benefit of bail.

Key takeaways

Delay ground for bail: trial will take sufficient time and there is no possibility of its being concluded in the near future, while the petitioner remains in custody since 09.11.2024 with the challan presented.ratio¶21
Since the main petition is disposed of, the pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Grant of regular bail under S.483 BNSS — The High Court of Punjab and Haryana (Manisha Batra, J.) allowed CRM-M No.15611 of 2025 filed by Alok, arrested on 09.11.2024 in FIR No. 309 dated 09.11.2024, Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, under Sections 140(3), 310(2), 238(a), 61(b) of BNS, concerning the alleged interception and abduction of complainant Rakesh Kumar, snatching of Rs. 15,000/- in cash and transfer of Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 62,000/- from his bank accounts; the petitioner was nominated as an accused on the disclosure statement of co-accused Ashish. Allowing the petition on the grounds of parity (co-accused Arun, Vikas and Dinesh having already been extended the benefit of bail), the petitioner's custody since 09.11.2024, presentation of challan, and the trial taking sufficient time with no possibility of early conclusion, the Court ordered release on personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned, expressly without commenting on the merits of the case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

240 CRM-M No.15611 of 2025 Date of decision: 27.05.2025

ALOK

…. Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

…. Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present : M r . Manoj Tanwar, Advocate for t he petitioner.

M r . Neeraj Poswal, A.A.G., Hary a na.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral)

T h is petition has been filed u n der Section 483 of Bharatiy a Nagarik Surak s ha Sanhita, 2023 (for short-‘B N SS’) for grant of regular bail t o the petitioner i n case arising out of FIR No. 3 09 dated 09.11.2024 registere d under Sections 140(3), 310(2), 238(a) 61(b) o f BNS, at Police Station Sada r Narnaul, Distri c t Mahendergarh.

A s per the allegations, on 08.11.2024, the complainant-Rakes h Kumar was go i ng towards his house on his sc o oty when he was intercepted b y occupants of a white colour car who were 3 in number. They stopped hi s vehicle and by pushing him inside their car, c o vered his face and took him t o an unknown r o ad. They snatched cash amoun t of 15000/- and mobile phon **e** from him. Th **e** y also got transferred an am **o** unt of 1 lakh and 62,000/ - respectively fr o m his bank accounts by usin g his mobile phone. Thereafter , they damaged t he SIM card of his mobile pho n e and after leaving him in th e forest area, the y fled away. After registration o f FIR against unknown persons ,

Jyoti 2025.05.28 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.15611 of 2025 - 2-

investigation proceedings were initiated. Dur i ng the course of investigation , CCTV footag e from the house of Sarpanch of Nimbi village was obtaine d which reveale d that the vehicle used in the cri m e was registered in the name o f one Anil who disclosed that he sold the sam e to one Ankit and on contact , Ankit disclose d that he had sold the same to a ccused Ashish. Accused Ashis h was arrested o n 09.11.2024. He suffered dis c losure statement admitting hi s complicity in t h e crime and also disclosed abo u t the involvement of the presen t petitioner and c o-accused. On the basis of whi c h, the present petitioner and co - accused were n ominated as such. The petitio n er was arrested on 09.11.2024 . He was inte r rogated and suffered disclo s ure statement admitting hi s involvement i n the crime and demarcat e d the place of occurrence . Investigation n ow stands concluded.

It is argued by learned counsel fo r the petitioner that he has bee n falsely implica t ed in this case on the basis of disclosure statements of the co - accused which cannot be considered to be ad m issible in evidence. He has n o hand in the ab d uction of the victim. No mone y was transferred in his account . The complain a nt himself had concocted a f alse story to escape from th e liability of pa y ing the amount of `50 lakhs to accused-Vikram. No injur y whatsoever, h a d been sustained by him. Th e re is no material on record t o connect him w i th the subject offences. He is in custody since long. Co-accuse d Arun, Vikas a n d Dinesh have been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he too , deserves to be given the same benefit. He ha s clean antecedents. With thes e broad submissi o ns, it is urged that the petition d eserves to be allowed.

Jyoti 2025.05.28 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.15611 of 2025 - 3-

St a tus report has been filed. It is a rgued by learned State counse l that keeping i n view the gravity of the allegations as levelled against th e petitioner, he d o es not deserve to be given con c ession of bail.

Rival submissions have been hear d . 6. T h e petitioner is alleged to have j oined the co-accused Dinesh i n pursuance of a conspiracy hatched with him and is further alleged to hav e abducted the v i ctim and snatched money from him, along with co-accused. H e is in custody s ince 09.11.2024, challan stan d s presented. Co-accused Arun , Vikas and Din e sh have been extended benefit o f bail. Trial will take sufficien t time and ther e is no possibility of its bein g concluded in the near future . Taking into c o nsideration the above discusse d facts but without meaning t o make any com m ent on the merits of the case, l e st they prejudice the case of th e prosecution/pe t itioner, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered t o be released on b ail subject to his furnishing pe r sonal as well as surety bonds t o the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistr a te/ CJM concerned. 7. Si n ce, the main petition is disposed of, pending application, if an y also stands dis p osed of accordingly.

(MANISHA BATRA) 27.05.2025 JUDGE Jyoti-IV Whether speaking/reasoned: Ye s /No. Whether reportable : Ye s /No

Jyoti 2025.05.28 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document