Allowed

Virender Alias Bhola Alias Veerendra Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CRM-M/50315/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a bail application filed under Section 483 BNS/439 Cr.P.C. for a petitioner in custody for eight months in a criminal case involving Sections 307 and other IPC offences, orderng release on bail upon furnishing surety.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court or concerned Magistrate.

Virender Alias Bhola Alias Veerendra Singh Vs… — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-50315-2026

¶2

-1-

¶3

211 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-50315-2026 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026

¶5

Virender @ Bhola @ Veerendra Singh

¶6

…Petitioner

¶7

vs.

¶8

State of Haryana …Respondent

¶9

Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat

¶10

Present : Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate with Ms. Dolly Shivani, Advocate and Mr. Dipanshu Kapur, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

¶12

¶13

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/439 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.73 dated 18.03.2024 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 452, 506 of IPC (Section 307 of IPC added later on), at Police Station Mundkati, District Palwal.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the alleged incident had taken place on 16.03.2024, whereas, the FIR in the present case was got registered by the complainant on 18.03.2024 and even during the course of investigation, the delay in registration of the FIR could not be explained by the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that the

¶16

HEMLATA 2026.09.11 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CRM-M-50315-2026

¶18

-2-

¶19

petitioner has been wrongly arrested in the present case on 10.01.2026 and is in custody for the last about 08 months. He further referred to the MLRs of Vikas and Mahipal (Annexures P-2 and P-3) to contend that both the injured had suffered minor injuries and even from the medical opinion (Annexure P-5), the offence under Section 307 of IPC is not made out against the present petitioner. He further submits that the injured, namely, Vikas, Mahipal and Biro Devi have already been discharged from the hospital and are hale and hearty. Learned counsel further submits that after completion of investigation, challan has already been presented against him and the case is listed before the trial Court on 08.10.2026 for framing of charges. Consequently, the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose.

¶20

On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. However, he admits that the petitioner was not involved in any other case in the past.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶22

In the present case, three injured, namely, Vikas, Mahipal and Biro Devi had suffered injuries at the hands of the present petitioner and his coaccused. However, all the injured have already been discharged from the hospital. Moreover, the trial has not even formally commenced against the

¶23

HEMLATA 2026.09.11 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-50315-2026

¶25

-3-

¶26

petitioner. Thus, the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose.

¶27

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned.

¶28

(N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 11.09.2026 JUDGE

¶29

hemlata

¶30

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

¶31

HEMLATA 2026.09.11 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Virender Alias Bhola Alias Veerendra Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virender Alias Bhola Alias Veerendra Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases