Rajender S nder Singh alias Jhendu v. State of Ha of Haryana
Case Details
CRM-M- -45135-2025 1- -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN CHANDIGA PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH 240 CRM-M-45135-2025 2025 Date of Decision: 6.11.2025 Rajender S nder Singh alias Jhendu v. State of Ha of Haryana …Petitioner. …Respondent. CORAM: AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. Present: Mr. Kartar Singh, Advocate fo cate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikram Singh, AAG, Hary , Haryana. **** AARADHN ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner, an accused in case n case FIR No. 166 dated 03.08.202 8.2022, registered a tered against him for commission of of offences under Sections 147, 14 47, 149, 302 of Indi f Indian Penal Code, at Police Station tation Odhan (Sirsa), District Sirsa, ha irsa, has filed the pre the present petition under Section 483 483 of BNSS for grant of bail. 2. Relevant facts as emerging fr ging from the documents on record b cord be noticed her ed hereinbelow:- Proceedings in the present ca nt case were initiated on the basis asis of complaint int lodged by Pawan Kumar, son o on of Dharam Singh, alleging there herein that his yo is younger brother Sandeep, aged aged about 25 years, is mason b on by profession. sion. On 03.08.2022, the complainan inant received two missed calls on h on his mobile pho phone at about 4.00 AM from the the phone of his brother. Thereafte eafter, when the c he complainant tried to call his brot brother Sandeep, his brother’s phon phone was ‘switch witched off’. After about 10-15 min minutes, complainant received a ca a call from his br is brother Sandeep, who asked the the complainant to let him talk to h to his GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45135-2025 2- -2 mother wh which the complainant arranged. ged. However, complainant’s moth other handed ove over the phone to him (c), when h en he heard voice of unknown perso erson on the pho phone saying that his brother Sand andeep is in their custody at Villag illage Khuiyan N n Nepalpur and the said unknown p wn persons asked him to come to to the said villag illage along with 4-5 persons for ta or taking back his brother. Shortl hortly, thereafter, fter, another phone call was rece received by him from the unknow known person, wh , who told him and his brother Sa r Sandeep had come to their hou house situated at d at Village Khuiyan Nepalpur and and had committed a wrongful ac ul act. The said pe id person again asked him (c) to com o come there failing which they wou would kill his bro brother. Complainant accompanie anied by his father Dharam Singh a gh as well as his s his uncles Ram Kishan and Ram am Kumar went to Village Khuiya uiyan Nepalpur, , where they came to know that S at Sandeep had come to the house use of Mani Ram am during night and had been caug caught red handed in the company any of Mani Ram’ am’s mother, namely, Parveen Kau Kaur in a compromising position an n and that Mani ani Ram along with other co-acc accused had murdered Sandeep b ep by inflicting in ng injuries with sticks, belt, fist and k and kick blows. It is further the case of pros prosecution that co-accused Parvee rveen Kaur upon pon having been caught red hande anded had sided with co-accused an d and as such, w h, was a party to the offence. It is It is further an admitted fact that th at the name of p of petitioner cropped up in the dis e disclosure statement of co-accuse cused Vikram alia alias Vicky and Sandeep, both of w of whom have since been granted th ed the concession sion of bail by the Coordinate Benc Bench of this Court vide orders date dated 31.7.2025 025 and 11.12.2024 passed in CR CRM-M-64576-2024 and CRM- -M- 40469-202 2024, respectively. Petitioner moved an applicatio lication for grant of bail before learne learned Additional tional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, who in ho in terms of order dated 05.08.202 .2025, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45135-2025 3- -3 dismissed t issed the said application. Aggrieve grieved of which, present petition ha tion has been filed f filed for grant of bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petit e petitioner submits that petitioner ha ner has been falsel falsely arrayed as an accused in the in the present case only on the basis o basis of disclosure osure statement of other co-accused, ed, who has since been granted th nted the concession ession of bail by this Court vide order n CRM- order dated 6.11.2025 passed in CRM M-18407-
Legal Reasoning
-2025. Learned counsel further su rther submits that assuming for the sak the sake of argumen guments, the story put forth by the pro the prosecution is taken to be true at i at its face value value (though not admitted), there wa ere was no occasion/motive for prese present petitioner t ioner to murder the deceased (younge younger brother of complainant Pawa t Pawan Kumar). It ar). It is also the submission of learne learned counsel that investigations qu ions qua petitioner, ioner, who was arrested on 26.8.20 .8.2024, are complete, (nothing wa ing was recovered i ered in pursuance of his disclosure sta ure statement) as challan has been file en filed, charge was e was framed on 22.11.2022, but th but the blikelihood of the trial bein al being completed leted in the near future is quite quite remote. Thus, his (P) furth further incarceratio ceration would not serve any useful pu eful purpose as the same would not on only be violativ iolative of his rights under Article rticle 21 of the Constitution of Indi India, including right to speedy trial but would would also be against the principle ciple of “Bail is a general rule and incarceratio ration is an exception” as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dataram vs. State of Uttar Pradesh an and another, 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131. 131. Prayer for allowing the petitio petition has been m made. 4. Per contra, learned State State counsel while opposing the submission issions raised by learned counsel unsel for the petitioner, submits th that petitioner ioner was a member of unlawful assembly which unleashed brut brutal attack on on the deceased, who as a conseq consequence thereof died. In view view of GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45135-2025 4- -4 gravity and and seriousness of offence, it has has been prayed that no case for gra grant of bail to petitioner is made out. 5. Heard learned counsel for for the parties and perused the documents ments on record. 6. Factual aspects of the case lea leading to the registration of the FI FIR have alread already been noticed in para 2 of the the order. It is not disputed that co- accused Vi Vikram alias Vicky and Sandeep ndeep who were specifically named amed in the FIR an and specific roles had been ass assigned to them, have since bee been granted the the concession of bail by the Co Coordinate Bench this Court vid vide orders date dated 31.7.2025 and 11.12.2024 pa 24 passed in CRM-M-64576-2024 an 024 and CRM-M-40 40469-2024, respectively. 7. In view of the submissions adv advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, ioner, but without commenting further urther on the merits of the case, the fa fact that petiti petitioner has been in custody since 2 26.08.2024, investigations qua hi qua him are comple omplete, for challan has already been y been filed, as also taking note of th e of the fact that ou that out of 22 prosecution witnesses, n sses, none has been examined till dat till date, thus, possib possibility of completion of trial in rial in the near future is quite remot remote, lenient view nt view is taken in favour of petitioner titioner who is not involved in any oth ny other criminal c inal case, by extending him conce concession of bail, for his furth further incarceratio ceration would not only be violative of tive of his rights under Article 21 of th 1 of the Constitutio titution of India, including right to ht to speedy trial but would also b also be against the st the principle of “Bail is a gener eneral rule and incarceration is a is an exception ion” as held by Hon’ble Supreme Co ra). me Court in Dataram’s case (supra). 8. Resultantly, petitioner is grant s granted the concession of bail subje subject to his furn is furnishing bail/surety bonds to t s to the satisfaction of learned tri ed trial GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45135-2025 5- -5 Court/Duty t/Duty Magistrate concerned. The The petitioner shall abide by th by the following c wing conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not not tamper with the evidence durin during the trial. (ii) The petitioner will ill not pressurize/ e intimidate the th prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall no l not leave the country without prio prior urt. permission of the trial Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not l not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an acc accused, or for commission of whic which he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall n ll not directly or indirectly coerc oerce, induce, threaten or promise to ise to any person acquainted with th ith the facts of the case so as to dissu dissuade him/her from disclosing suc g such facts to the Court or to any any police officer or tamper with th ith the evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not berty. not in any manner misuse his liberty (vii) The petitioner shall f ll furnish his address and mobi obile number to the Trial Court fo rt forthwith and shall not change th ge the same till the conclusion of the f the trial and in case for any reaso eason, the petitioner seeks to chang ange any of the aforesaid, the sam same shall be done only with prio prior intimation to the learned Tri Trial Court, stating the reason for th for the same. (viii) The petitioner will appe appear before the trial Court on eac n each and every date fixed, unless i ess is exempted by a specific order der of Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty M ty Magistrate may impose any oth other condition, as deemed app g appropriate while releasing the th petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the present petiti t petition is allowed and it is made cle de clear that in case in case there is any breach of the afore e aforesaid conditions, the State shall b shall be GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -45135-2025 6- -6 at liberty t erty to seek cancellation of bail as ail as granted to the petitioner by th by this order. 10.
Decision
In view of the above, it is cla t is clarified that the observations mad ns made herein are l n are limited for the purpose of prese f present proceedings and would not b d not be construed a trued as an opinion on the merits of the s of the case and the trial would procee proceed independen endently of the aforesaid observations ns. .2025 06.11.2025 gbs NEY) (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.10 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document