The High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner charged under BNS and Arms Act, holding that continued detention serves no purpose as investigation was complete and trial would take considerable time.
Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the competent court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM-M-20503-2026 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
211 CRM-M-20503-2026 Date of decision: 26th May, 2026
Satish
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present: Mr. Robin Singh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Neeraj Poswal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL):-
The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 657 dated 26.12.2025 registered under Sections 109(1), 115, 190, 191(2), 191(3) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 304(2) and 61(2) of BNS were added later on) at Police Station Bhiwani Sadar, District Bhiwani.
PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.05.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-20503-2026 -2-
between him and the occupants of the car and then they had left. In the morning of 26.12.2025, the petitioner who was the owner of that car, called him on the phone and asked him the reason for stopping his car. He also told him to come out. He apprised his uncle Inder Singh about this fact, who talked with the petitioner and settled the matter. On the same day at about 12:15 PM, he was sitting outside his house along with his son, when accused-Nasib and Upendra reached there and started beating him. Thereafter, the present petitioner along with co-accused Pawan, Deepak, Jai Singh and 5-6 more persons unknown to him, also reached there and opened an assault upon him. The petitioner threw a brick at his head due to which he fell on the street. Then, he struck another blow with a brick on his head. On hearing the noises, his cousin brother Ajay @ Monu had reached there and fired a shot with his pistol. Thereafter, all the assailants caught hold of him and extended beatings to him. A shot was also fired at Ajay @ Monu and then the accused fled away. Complainant and Ajay @ Monu were taken to the hospital.
in the crime. Investigation qua the petitioner now stands completed.
PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.05.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-20503-2026 -3-
5 . Per contra , learned State counsel has argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be extended the benefit of bail. Therefore, it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.
PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.05.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-20503-2026 -4-
Investigation qua him stands concluded. Obviously, the trial will take considerable time to conclude as none out of 26 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. As such, continued detention of the petitioner will not serve any fruitful purpose. It is well settled proposition of law that pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing and that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. The object of jail is to secure the appearance of the accused during the trial and it can neither be punitive nor preventive and the deprivation of liberty has been considered as a punishment. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for his release on bail. Accordingly, 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/Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.
[MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE
26th May, 2026
Parveen Sharma
1. Whether speaking/ reasoned
2. Whether reportable
: Yes / No : Yes / No
PARVEEN SHARMA 2026.05.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in view of completed investigation and prolonged pre-trial detention?
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Satish
State of Haryana
Manisha Batra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
