Parmod Kumar Alias Parmod Vs State of Haryana

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.190 dated 26.06.2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Tohana, District Fatehabad, under Sections 148, 149, 302, 323, 427 and 506 IPC and Section 325 IPC (added during investigation) .

¶17

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for more than 5 months. He alleges false implication. He was not named in the FIR, however, after 11 days of the incident, supplementary statement was recorded, wherein he came to be implicated. Co-accused similarly circumstanced, from whom a danda was recovered, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.01.2026, Annexure P-7, after being in custody for 5 months and 11 days. No recovery was effected from the petitioner. Charges were framed on 16.12.2025, however, none out of 49 PWs has been examined.

¶18

MOHIT 2026.03.25 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

� CRM-M-3481-2026 (O&M) 2

¶20

He is not involved in any other case.

¶21

Learned State counsel and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner with regard to being part of unlawful assembly and causing injuries to the deceased Om Parkash as well as injured. However, learned State counsel is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case; the petitioner being not involved in any other case and the co-accused having been released on bail.

¶22

Heard.

¶23

5 . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 5 months and 14 days; not involved in any other case; co-accused is on bail; charges stand framed on 16.12.2025; prosecution evidence has to commence and in all there are 49 PWs; the trial is likely to take a considerable time and further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed �

¶24

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶26

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶27

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

¶28

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to

¶29

MOHIT 2026.03.25 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶30

� CRM-M-3481-2026 (O&M) 3

¶31

the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

¶32

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

¶33

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

¶34

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

¶35

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

¶36

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

¶37

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

¶38

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.

¶39

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE

¶40

25.03.2026 M.Kamra
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes / No
Whether reportable	: Yes / No

¶41

MOHIT 2026.03.25 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parmod Kumar Alias Parmod v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmod Kumar Alias Parmod 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harmit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Hewlett Packard Enterprise India Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Tarsem Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others

Mandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kamal Kuttappan Vs State of Haryana and Another

Hardeep Singh Vs State of Punjab