ARBAJ KHAN v. STATE OF HARYANA

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

#1. The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) (Section 439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.309 dated 26.12.2024 registered under Sections 103(2), 61(2), 111(2) (3) (4) (5), 238(1), 324(5), 190 and 191(3), 109 of BNS (corresponding sections 302, 120-B, 201, 427, 149, 148, 307 of IPC) and section 25 of arms act (109 BNS (307 of IPC) later on deleted) and Sections 48, 49 BNS, registered at Police Station Radaur, District Yamuna Nagar, Haryana.

#2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Sections 48 and 49 BNS have been added subsequently. On his oral request, Sections 48 and 49 BNS are added in the head note and prayer clause of the petition.

#3. Registry is directed to make necessary corrections in the head note and prayer clause of the petition.

#4. The case of the prosecution is that an FIR was got registered on the statement of Narender Singh that on 26.12.2024, he received a phone call CRM-M-25790-2026 (O&M) 2 that some unknown persons fired shots on his cousin Virender outside Power Gym at Kheri Lakha Singh and he was being taken to Gaba Hospital, Yamuna Nagar. On reaching the hospital, he came to know that one Arjun was injured and his cousin Virender and one Pankaj had died in the incident. The role attributed to the petitioner is that he had handed over his father’s new Toyota Fortuner car to co-accused Sachin Handa and Harsh Bali which was later used by the co-accused (shooters) to flee away from the place of occurrence of the incident.

#5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not been named in the FIR. He was not present at the place of occurrence. The actual firing is attributed to Romil Vohra and Shubham Pandit. Romil Vohra has since died in an encounter and Shubham Pandit is not arrested yet. There is no evidence on record whether he was aware that his father’s vehicle has been misused for committing the crime. The petitioner has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statement of the co- accused. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since

26.12.2024. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

#7. Notice of motion. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. However, he has not disputed the fact the petitioner is in custody for more than 01 year and 06 months. He further submits that out of total cited 126 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined so far.

#8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the CRM-M-25790-2026 (O&M) 3 record.

#9. After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that no specific role of firing or causing injuries has been attributed to the petitioner; apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of crime; the petitioner is in custody for more than 01 year and 06 months; out of total cited 126 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined so far; conclusion of trial is likely to take time and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

#10. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

#11. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

#12. It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order, if the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

#13. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

10.07.2026 Janki (H.S.GREWAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No