Allowed¶24

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2026CRM-M/18271/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-18271-2026, Sachin v. State of Haryana, P&H HC (Vinod S. Bhardwaj J.), decided 01.05.2026: Section 483 BNSS 2023 regular-bail petition ALLOWED on parity with co-accused Akash (already bailed vide order dated 26.02.2026 in CRM-M-59740-2025); FIR No. 252 dated 11.11.2024, PS Ambala Sadar, District Ambala, under Sections 103(2), 190, 191(3), 61 BNS 2023; State conceded parity; no comment on merits; witness non-influence condition imposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, subject to the condition of not threatening or influencing prosecution witnesses. ¶24

Sachin Vs State of Haryana — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Sachin, arraigned in FIR No. 252 dated 11.11.2024 (PS Ambala Sadar, District Ambala) under Sections 103(2), 190, 191(3) and 61 BNS 2023, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS 2023, his case being claimed at parity with co-accused Akash who has already been granted regular bail.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration that the petitioner's case is at parity with co-accused Akash, and without commenting on the merits, the Judge deemed it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶23

Key takeaways

As a condition of release, the petitioner shall not extend any threat to and shall not influence prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.obiter¶25
Observations made in the judgment shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case; the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Vinod S. Bhardwaj J., oral), 01.05.2026, allowed CRM-M-18271-2026, a regular-bail petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed by Sachin, accused in FIR No. 252 dated 11.11.2024 of Police Station Ambala Sadar, District Ambala, registered under Section(s) 103(2), 190, 191(3) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Bail was granted solely on the ground of parity with co-accused Akash, who had been granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 26.02.2026 passed in CRM-M-59740-2025; the respondent-State conceded the parity. Release is conditional on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate and on the petitioner not extending threats to, or influencing, prosecution witnesses. The Court expressly refrained from commenting on merits, leaving adjudication to the Trial Court on the available material.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

201

¶3

CRM-M-18271-2026 Date of decision: 01.05.2026

SACHIN

......Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA

.......Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

¶10

*********

¶11

Present: - Ms. Anita Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Paras Talwar, Senior DAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶15

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 252 dated 11.11.2024 registered under Section(s) 103(2), 190, 191(3) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Ambala Sadar, District Ambala.

¶16

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the case of the petitioner is at par with his co-accused Akash who has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 26.02.2026 passed in CRM-M-59740-2025.

¶17

Counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand does not dispute the aforesaid facts and admits that the case of present petitioner is at

¶18

VISHAL SHARMA 2026.05.01 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-18271-2026

¶20

-2-

¶21

parity with above mentioned co-accused persons.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petition.

¶23

Without commenting on the merits of the present case and taking into consideration that the case of the petitioner is at parity with his co-accused namely Akash, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶24

The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶25

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.

¶26

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

¶27

MAY 01, 2026 Vishal Sharma

¶28

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE

¶29

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

¶30

VISHAL SHARMA 2026.05.01 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Vs State of Haryana and Another

Haryana State Pollution Control Board Vs Akram Jamal & Ors.

Gursewak Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jaswinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manish Salhan Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Asha Rani Vs State of Punjab and Others