Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sagar Kumar @ Sahil vs State Of Haryana on 30 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
119 CRM-M-18678-2026
Date of decision: 30.04.2026
Date of uploading: 30.04.2026
Sagar Kumar @ Sahil ....Petitioner
V/s
State of Haryana ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:- Mr. Shailender Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG, Haryana.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.95 dated 10.02.2025, registered under Sections 109(1), 308(5), 351(3), 61(2), 111(2) BNS and Sections 25-54-59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar.
2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out by the petitioner in the present petition) is as follows:-
"Copy of the article is in jail - Report No. 11 dated 7.2.2025 Diary Brief At present I am ASI Hazir Chowki who at this very moment Himanshu Vij 20 Shri Krishna Vij resident of HNO Kalindi Colony Phase-2 Y. Nagar Police Station City Y. Nagar came to Hazir Chowki Rampura and submitted a request which is for jail. To In charge Police Post Rampura, Shri Man ji, NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |2 I request that I am Himanshu Vij 5/0 Shri Krishna Vij resident of HNO Kalindi Colony Phase-2 Y. Nagar Police Station City Nagar and I have an office in the name of Shri Krishna Enterprises near Mohan Murge Y. Nagar and yesterday on 6.02.24 1 received a call on my mobile number 992849000 from some unknown name and address number 447961265817 who threatened to kill me and told me that I have to talk to you or Inspector Matoria, Vicky Pandit 1 have enmity with him, I will take revenge for this enmity from you. Please give the name and address of the unknown person. Action should be taken against SD HIMANSHU in whose time today on 10.2.2025 Himanshu Vij S/O Shri Krishna Vij resident of HNO Kalindi Colony Phase-2 Y. Nagar Thana City Y. Nagar again came to the outpost on 10.2.2025 and marked his presence which is in jail and stated that I am a resident of the above name and address and I had given an application on 7.02.2025 on my mobile number 9992849000 through name and address unknown 447961265817 about threatening to kill me and Inspector Rakesh Matoria, Vicky Pandit to take revenge of old enmity, in connection with which Noni Rana son of Joginder again called me from the same number and Noni Rana threatened to kill me and my family and in return for this, he again called me from the same number On 8.02.2025, I was called by the number 447961265817 and was asked for a ransom of Rs. I crore and he told me that you do not know whether there were any shots fired at your house or not, I myself had got the shots fired at your house, check your CCTV camera, I was very scared of this and I did not tell this to my family or the police that Noni Rana is a criminal type of person, he can attack me or my family at any time by himself or through someone else, due to fear 1 blocked my CCTV camera and I saw that a boy had come to my house on 6.02.2025 at around 2:30 PM and that name and address unknown person came to the gate in front of my house and was seen firing four shots at the building of my house with two illegal weapons (country made pistol) in his hand with the intention to kill me, but At that time no member of my family was out of the house, if any member of the family had been out of the house, then his life could have been lost. And I had informed you about this but I was more scared that Noni NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |3 Rana himself or through some other person can attack me or can get it done, due to which my and my family's life is in danger. Strictest legal action should be taken against Noni Rana and the rich people who attacked my house with the intention of killing me, the life and property of me or my family should be protected. I have used the footage of the CCTV camera installed I have presented to you the recording of Noni Rana's threat on my mobile phone. Today I have given you my statement Pushpa Pan. I have recorded the footage of the CCTV camera installed at my house and read it, which is fine. SD HIMANSHU Action Police On 7.2.2025, Himanshu above mentioned had submitted a request or attendance post on which report no. 11 dated 7.2.25 was registered and Himanshu above mentioned had drawn his attention to the above on 10.02.2025 today, from the above mentioned attention or from the verified report and the verification of the case done secretly, on the basis of the verification done at the intelligence level and the questioning of the people relevant to the case, prima facie involvement of Noni Rana son of Joginder resident near ITI Yamuna Nagar or his associates has come to light in this case. This person or his other associates conspire among themselves in a planned manner and make threatening calls so that people give them money out of fear and these people get justice which is based on the compelling request and from the verified circumstances till now, the case has been brought to justice as a crime. On finding it to be under sections 351(3), 109(1)308(5) 61(2) BNS 25/54/59 Arms Act, a written complaint is being filed and sent to the police station of EHC Vijay Kumar 580. After registering a formal case, the Magistrate should be informed of the case and a special report of the case should be sent to the officers or the area magistrate. 1, ASI along with the plaintiff, am leaving for the spot of the case. Today, Police Post Rampura, Sunil, ASI, Police Post Rampura, Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, Date 10.02.2025, Today, Police Station Haryana, Arrived, written report ASI Sunil Kumar No. 429, Police Post Rampura, Police Station City Yamuna Nagar, Badast EHC Vijay Kumar No. 580, case No. 95 dated 10.02.2025 under sections 351(3), 109(1), 308(5) 61(2) BNS 25/54/59 Arms 2, Police Station City Yamuna Nagar was NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |4 registered. Copies of the FIR were prepared through computer which are being sent as special report to Bajaria e-mail to the concerned officer or to the area magistrate assistant Jagadhri. The copy along with the original article is being sent to the investigating officer on the spot by the incoming EHC Vijay Kumar No. 580. Entry record was done as per law. This case was registered in the presence of SI Bhupendra Singh"
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 15.02.2025. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further iterated assuming arguendo, the prosecution version available at this juncture is taken to be correct, the petitioner is not the one who is stated to have fired. Learned counsel has further submitted that all the prime private prosecution witnesses including the FIR-complainant stand examined. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for more than one year. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.
4. Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar. The same be kept on record. Learned State counsel while raising submissions in tandem with the said reply has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 28.04.2026, which is taken on record.
NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |5
5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.
6. The petitioner was arrested on 15.02.2025 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 03.05.2025. Total 35 prosecution witness have been cited, out of which 8 stand examined and one has been given up till date. It is not in dispute that the conclusion of trial will take long time. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to the dicta passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 494, relevant whereof reads thus:
"18. Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. This humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. Those factors may be social and economic, may be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with indigence or other privations.
19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime."
The rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties shall be gone into during the course of the trial. Nothing tangible has been NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |6 brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioners absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1. As per custody certificate filed today, the petitioner has undergone 1 year, 2 months and 10 days & is shown to be involved in one more case/FIR. However, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822- 2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191.
Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioners in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.04.30 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18678-2026 Page |7
(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.
(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.
(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.
8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioners.
9. Ordered accordingly.
10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
April 30, 2026
Naveen
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
NAVEEN NAGPAL
2026.04.30 17:16
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
HIgh Court Chandigarh