Ankit Bhalia v. Haryana State of Haryana
Case Details
IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH PUNJAB & HARYANA 106 CRM-M-55077 Date of decision: 55077-2024(O&M) decision: 11.11.2025 Pankaj Bhalia @ @ Pankaj @ Ankit Bhalia ...Petitioner VERSUS Haryana State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Advocate; Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate; Present :- Mr. Mr. Mr. Prashant Singh Chauhan, Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Advocate and petitioner. Dr. Haryana. (Ms.) Malvika Singh, DAG, Haryana ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 2025 CRM-41560-2025 Allowed as prayed for. Allowed Main case The present petition has been filed The filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case
Legal Reasoning
case bearing FIR No.324 dated 12.08.2022 registered under Section 365 (Sections (Sections 302, 201, 34, 379-B & 120B added later on) of the Indian Penal Code, Code, 1860 at Police Station Rewari Rewari City, District Rewari, Haryana. 2. The present FIR was registered on the The the statement of one Goverdhan Lal Arora and the the contents thereof reads as under: under:- “To, The SHO, Police Station City “To, City Kotwali, Alwar, Rajasthan. Subject: For Lodging the report. It Subject: is requested that my younger brother namely Mangat Arora, son broth of Late Sh. Madan lal Arora, caste Khatri, aged about 50 years, caste years, resident of House No. 163, Scheme No. 2, Alwar, Rajasthan, who Scheme who is in the business of metal scrap. He had to take money from Ankit scrap. Ankit Bhalia, because of which a dispute dispute was going on form last one one and half month. On dated SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10.08.2022, suddenly the above-said 10.08.2022, said Ankit Bhalia called my younger brother at Rewari to collect younger collect the entire money and on 106 CRM-M-55077 55077-2024(O&M) 2 10.08.2022 at 8'o clock in the morning 10.08.2022 morning my younger brother left for Rewari on motorcycle HF Deluxe RJ Rewari RJ 02 GS 6514. My brother had a mobile mobile number 9414893056, 9001651188, 9001651188, and from which on 10.08.2022 since 12' o clock there is 10.08.2022 is not contact with any of the family membersand his mobile was switched family switched off after 1’o clock in the night. After searching a lot by by family members when my brother was not found, then we reported brother reported the said incident to the Police station Kotwali, Alwar. upon Police upon which police registered a missing report, and the same was missing sent to Rewari through ASI Arun. That along with him, I and other Arun. other people also went there, where above-said Ankit Bhalia son where of Sh. Dayal Chand, resident of 4123 4123 Mohalla Sigriwara, Rewari, Rewari, Police station City Rewari, Mobile no. 9896977707, Sushil son Mobile son of Ram Murti, resident pf 6752, Mohalla Gudiya Sarai, Police 6752, Police station City Rewari, Mobile по.9813168945 met us and they were по.9813168945 were formally interrogated by the police. After questioning, I suspect police. suspect that the above said people, along with some other people have along have kidnapped my brother from rewari nearby Ankit Bhalia's house rewari house because of money rivalry, killed him and disposed the dead killed dead body of my brother. It is necessary to take legal action against necessary against them by lodging a report against them, for which this report is against is presented, therefore same be registered and legal action be registered taken against them. Dated 12.08.2022, Sd/- Govind lal Arora, 12.08.2022, Arora, Applicant- Govardhan lal Arora son of late Sh. Madan lal Arora, Arora Arora, caste Khatri, aged about 55 years resident of 118, Multan Multan nagar, Daudpur, Alwar, Rajasthan, mobile no 9413065548.” Rajasthan, 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf Learned behalf of the petitioner inter alia contends that the the case at hand is based on circumstantial circumstantial evidence. He further contends that as as per the case of the prosecution, prosecution, the murder of deceased- Mangat Arora was was committed by Manoj and Deepak Deepak @ Deepu. While accused- Manoj is stated to be cousin of the petitioner, Deepak @ Deepu is a hired criminal, who is involved in multiple other cases. He further contends that there is no overt act attributed attributed to the petitioner in causing causing death of deceased-Mangat SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 106 CRM-M-55077 55077-2024(O&M) 3 Arora and that the he petitioner does not have any criminal criminal antecedents. Besides, the petitioner has has undergone an actual custody of of about 03 years and 02 and a half months. The The trial is at an initial stage and and will take long time in its conclusion as only only 17 out of 46 witnesses have been been examined so far. 4. Learned State Counsel however contends Learned contends that the complicity of the petitioner is well well established from the fact that that the body of the deceased was recovered from the premises of the petitioner and and that both the co-accused Manoj and Deepak Deepak @ Deepu specifically named named the petitioner as an accomplice in their their disclosure statements. The recovery recovery of dead body was also effected pursuant pursuant to the disclosure statement of Deepak Deepak @ Deepu, who himself had no motive to to implicate the petitioner falsely. falsely. The cousin of the deceased also specifically specifically disclosed that the deceased-Mangat Mangat Arora had gone to the petitioner’s premises premises on receipt of a phone call in in relation to the money owed by the petitioner itioner to the deceased. She however however does not dispute that the petitioner has clean clean antecedents and is not involved involved in any other case. Even as per the concluded concluded investigation, no overt act has has been attributed to him in the act of strangulation strangulation or presence at the time when the the deceased was murdered or buried at the premises premises in question. There is no denial denial to the period of custody trial. and the stage of trial. 5. I have have heard learned counsel for the the respective parties and have gone through the the documents appended along with with the present petition. 6. Taking into consideration that the petitioner Taking petitioner has already been in custody for more more than 03 years and 02 months, his his clean antecedents and that the trial is likely likely to take long in its conclusion as as 29 witnesses are yet to be examined, I deem deem it appropriate to allow the present present petition. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition is Accordingly, allowed and the petitioner is SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ordered to be admitted admitted to regular bail subject to his his furnishing bail/surety bonds 106 CRM-M-55077 55077-2024(O&M) 4 to the satisfaction satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate concerned. 8. It is is made clear that the petitioner shall shall not extend any threat and shall not influence influence any prosecution witness in any any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove The shall not be construed as an expression on the the merits of the case and the trial Court Court shall decide the case on the basis of available available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand Pending
Decision
stand disposed of. 11.11.2025 Sumit Gusain (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) (VINOD JUDGE speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned reportable Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document