Shaidan @ Arman Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

Shaidan @ Arman Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail — petitioner to be released subject to furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, Shaidan @ Arman, arrested in FIR No.161 dated 29.05.2025 (Sections 309(6) and 310(2) BNS), Police Station Kheripul, District Faridabad, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Court's answer

With twenty prosecution witnesses and none examined, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future.

Ratio / Principle

Since the investigation is complete and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation, his continued incarceration would not serve any useful purpose.

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.ratio¶27
The prosecution primarily relies upon disclosure statements and recoveries effected during investigation, whose evidentiary value would be a matter for appreciation during trial.obiter¶27
The observations made in the order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted — High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Manisha Batra, J., oral orders) allowed the petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by Shaidan @ Arman seeking regular bail in FIR No.161 dated 29.05.2025, Police Station Kheripul, District Faridabad, registered under Sections 309(6) and 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for an alleged night-time forcible entry by about seven persons into the complainant Brahmpal's house, assault upon him, and theft of Rs.8,200/- and a gold chain; the offence under Section 309(6) BNS was subsequently deleted. The petitioner was not named in the FIR, was arrested on secret information along with three co-accused, and the prosecution case rested primarily on disclosure statements and recoveries (Rs.1600/- and an iron rod); the Court left the evidentiary value of such material for appreciation at trial. With investigation concluded, challan presented, charges framed, the petitioner in custody since 13.06.2025, and none of the twenty prosecution witnesses examined so that the trial was not likely to conclude in the near future, the Court held that continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose and ordered release on personal/surety bonds, clarifying that its observations would neither express an opinion on the merits nor influence the outcome of the trial.

CRM-M-15168-2026 (O&M)

-1-

216

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-15168-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.07.2026

Shaidan @ Arman

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking the concession of regular bail in FIR No.161 dated 29.05.2025, registered under Sections 309(6) and 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita at Police Station Kheripul, District Faridabad.

Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint moved by complainant Brahmpal alleging therein that during the intervening night of 28/29.05.2025, while he was sleeping at his residence, about seven persons forcibly entered his house, assaulted him and absconded with cash amounting to Rs.8,200/- and a gold chain. On hearing his cries, his son Dinesh reached the spot and attempted to apprehend the assailants, who, however, managed to flee. On the basis of the said

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.08 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15168-2026 (O&M)

-2-

allegations, the present FIR came to be registered. During investigation, the complainant was medico-legally examined and was found to have sustained one abrasion near the left eye. Subsequently, on the basis of secret information, the petitioner and three other co-accused were arrested. The petitioner suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the subject crime and got recovered an amount of Rs.1600/-, which was stated to be part of the stolen money and an iron rod allegedly used in the commission of the offence. Subsequently, offence under Section 309(6) of BNS was deleted. Investigation now stands completed.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated. He was not named in the FIR. He was arrested subsequently only on the basis of secret information and no Test Identification Parade (TIP) was ever conducted. There is neither any CCTV footage nor any independent witness connecting the petitioner with the occurrence. The prosecution case against the petitioner rests only on the disclosure statements of the accused and the alleged recovery of Rs.1600/-, which does not establish his complicity. Learned counsel submits that the complainant sustained only a simple injury and no further medical opinion was obtained. It is also argued that while the FIR refers to seven assailants, the challan has been presented against eight accused, thereby creating doubt regarding the prosecution version. The petitioner has remained in custody since 13.06.2025. Investigation stands concluded and challan has been presented. Conclusion of trial would take considerable time as none out of total twenty prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. His further

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.08 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15168-2026 (O&M)

-3-

detention would serve no useful purpose. The petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. It is, thus, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

Status report and the custody certificate of the petitioner have been filed. Learned State counsel has argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed.

This Court has heard the rival submissions.

The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have trespassed into the complainant's house and assaulted him. The petitioner has remained in custody for a considerable period. The investigation stands concluded, the final report has already been presented and charges have been framed. The status report further reveals that there are as many as twenty prosecution witnesses and none of them has been examined so far. Thus, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. It is also not disputed that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the prosecution primarily relies upon the disclosure statements and the recoveries allegedly effected during investigation. The evidentiary value of such material would be a matter for appreciation during trial. Since the investigation is complete and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation, his continued incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. In view thereof, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the same is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.08 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15168-2026 (O&M)

-4-

learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

It is clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner.

07.07.2026

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.08 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document