Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ankush Alias Ankush Verma vs State Of Haryana on 22 April, 2026
CRM-M-20350-2026(O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
226
CRM-M-20350-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 22.04.2026
Ankush @ Ankush Verma ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
*****
Present : Mr. Yashveer Kharb, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Vishal Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.
*****
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0424 dated 31.12.2025, registered under Sections 309(5) BNS and 25 of the Arms Act (Final report presented under Sections 309(5), 312, 3(5), 61 BNS and 27 of the Arms Act) at Police Station Israna, District Panipat.
2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for about 3 months. He is not seen in the CCTV footage, as the ones therein were had muffled faces. His name came in the supplementary statement of complainant made after 7 days. There is no theft that had taken place. There is a compromise that has been arrived between the parties. Challan has been presented on 20.03.2026, charges have not been framed and in all there are 20 PWs. He is not involved in any other case.
3. The custody certificate dated 21.04.2026 filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 2 months and 29 days.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are ASHOK KUMAR 2026.04.22 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-20350-2026(O&M) 2 specific allegations levelled against the petitioner who tried to rob the complainant. He, however, is unable to controvert with regard to stage and petitioner being not involved in any other case.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant affirms the factum of compromise having been arrived at between the parties and states that name of the petitioner came to be mentioned due to some misunderstanding.
6. Heard.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for 2 months and 29 days; not involved in any other case; challan stands presented on 20.03.2026, charges are yet to be framed and there are total 20 PWs; compromise has been effected between the parties, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, 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.
8. 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:-
(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.
(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.
(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.
(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, ASHOK KUMAR 2026.04.22 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-20350-2026(O&M) 3 it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.
(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.
(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.
9. 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.
10. 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.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
22.04.2026
ashok
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No
ASHOK KUMAR
2026.04.22 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document