[Cites 14, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ram Dinesh vs State Of Haryana on 16 March, 2026
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -1-
and other connected matters.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
130
Date of decision: 16.03.2026.
(1)
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M).
RAM DINESH
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(2)
CRM-M-50788-2025 (O&M).
RAM DINESH
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(3)
CRM-M-53718-2025 (O&M).
DIPIN
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
1 of 14
::: Downloaded on - 21-03-2026 11:04:20 :::
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -2-
and other connected matters.
(4)
CRM-M-50191-2025 (O&M).
DIPIN
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(5)
CRM-M-52858-2025 (O&M).
ANKIT ALIAS GURU
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(6)
CRM-M-54192-2025 (O&M).
ANKIT @ GURU
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(7)
CRM-M-54511-2025 (O&M).
RAHUL TOMAR
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
2 of 14
::: Downloaded on - 21-03-2026 11:04:20 :::
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -3-
and other connected matters.
(8)
CRM-M-54196-2025 (O&M).
RAHUL TOMAR
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(9)
CRM-M-56063-2025 (O&M).
YASH ALIAS PANDU
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
(10)
CRM-M-56021-2025 (O&M).
YASH ALIAS PANDU
...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent(s)
***
3 of 14
::: Downloaded on - 21-03-2026 11:04:20 :::
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -4-
and other connected matters.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present :- Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s) in CRM-M-50966-2025 and
CRM-M-50788-2025.
Mr. Ajay Kumar Dahiya, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s) in CRM-M-56063-2025 and
CRM-M-56021-2025.
Mr. Ankit Karna, Advocate, and
Ms. Preeti Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s) in CRM-M-54196-2025 and
CRM-M-54511-2025.
Mr. Randeep S. Dhull, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s) in CRM-M-54192-2025 and
CRM-M-52858-2025.
Mr. Akash Dalal, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s) in CRM-M-50191-2025 and
CRM-M-53718-2025.
Mr. Paras Talwar, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
All the aforesaid ten petitions, seeking the concession of regular
bail by the respective petitioners, are being disposed of by this common order,
as they arise out of the two FIRs registered in reference to the same occurrence
and involve interconnected facts and issues.
2 The details of the cases and the respective FIRs wherein they
have been filed are tabulated as under: -
Sr. No. FIR No.22 dated 21.01.2024, FIR No.23 dated
under Section(s) 285, 307, 384, 21.01.2024, under
506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Section(s) 307 and 34
Code, 1860, (Sections 120-B, 109, of the Indian Penal
111, 386, 387, 412 and 507 of the Code, 1860, (Sections
IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the 120-B, 109 and 111 of
4 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -5-
and other connected matters.
Arms Act, 1959 added later on), the IPC and Sections 25
registered at Police Station and 27 of the Arms Act,
Gohana City, District Sonepat. 1959 added later on),
registered at Police
Station Gohana City,
District Sonepat.
1 CRM-M-50966-2025 CRM-M-50788-2025
titled as titled as
Ram Dinesh Vs. State of Haryana. Ram Dinesh Vs. State
of Haryana.
2 CRM-M-53718-2025 CRM-M-50191-2025
titled as titled as
Dipin Vs. State of Haryana Dipin Vs. State of
Haryana
3 CRM-M-54192-2025 CRM-M-52858-2025
titled as titled as
Ankit alias Guru State of Haryana Ankit alias Guru State
of Haryana
4 CRM-M-54511-2025 CRM-M-54196-2025
titled as titled as
Rahul Tomar Vs. State of Haryana Rahul Tomar Vs. State
of Haryana
5 CRM-M-56063-2025 CRM-M-56021-2025
titled as titled as
Yash alias Pandu Vs. State of Yash alias Pandu Vs.
Haryana State of Haryana
3 For brief reference, the facts, are being taken from CRM-M-
50966-2025 titled as Ram Dinesh Vs. State of Haryana.
4 Succinctly stated, the facts leading to the registration of FIR
No.22 dated 21.01.2024 on the statement made by the complainant Neeraj
Gupta son of Rajender Gupta, resident of Hukam Chand Mandi, Gohana, are
that he stated that he was running a sweet shop under the name and style of "
"Lala Maturam Rajender Prasad" situated near Shiv Chowk, Purani Anaj
Mandi, Gohana. According to the complainant, on 21.01.2024 at about 10:30
5 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -6-
and other connected matters.
a.m., while he along with his staff was present at the shop and his younger
brother Raman was sitting at the cash counter, three unidentified persons, with
their faces covered, arrived on a motorcycle from the side of Old Anaj Mandi,
Gohana and stopped in front of the shop. It is alleged that the said persons
opened indiscriminate fire, firing approximately 30 to 40 rounds, most of
which were directed towards the shop and with an intention to kill. It was
further alleged that at that time Bijender, a resident of village Mahara, who
had come to the shop for supplying milk, was also fired upon by the assailants.
The complainant stated that while fleeing from the spot, the assailants threw
a note in front of the shop demanding a ransom of Rs.2 crores and threatened
that in the event the said amount was not arranged, they would kill the person
running the shop. The complainant further stated that the identity of the
assailants could not be ascertained as their faces were covered and sought
appropriate legal action against the unknown persons, whereupon the above
FIR came to be registered.
5 Succinctly stated, the facts leading to the registration of FIR
No.23 dated 21.01.2024, on the basis of the statement made by Bijender son
of Krishan, resident of village Mahra, District Sonipat, are that on 21.01.2024,
at about 10:30 a.m., he had gone to deliver milk at the shop of Lala Matu Ram
Halwai (Confectioner) at Gohana. It is alleged that at that time, three unknown
persons arrived on a motorcycle from the side of the Old Grain Market and
after positioning themselves near the idol of Lord Shiva, opened
indiscriminate fire towards the shop of Lala Matu Ram Halwai. The
complainant stated that, upon hearing the gunshots, he got frightened and
attempted to run inside the shop, during which he sustained a gunshot injury
6 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -7-
and other connected matters.
on the right side of his head. It was further stated that thereafter, the driver of
Lala Matu Ram Halwai transported him to PGI, Khanpur Kalan for medical
treatment, where he was provided first aid by the attending doctor. The
complainant further stated that he subsequently came to know that the
assailants had fled from the spot towards the side of the Grain Market. On the
basis of the aforesaid allegations, the complainant sought appropriate legal
action against the three unknown persons, whereupon the present FIR came
to be registered.
6 The details of the role attributed to each of the petitioner's
hereinabove is as under: -
Sr. Case No. Title FIR No Role attributed
No.
1 CRM- RAM FIR No.22 dated • Hosted a
M- DINESH V/S 21.01.2024, under meeting at his
50966- STATE OF Section(s) 285, 307, residence where
2025 HARYANA 384, 506 and 34 of the the conspiracy
Indian Penal Code, was allegedly
1860, (Sections 120- finalized.
B, 109, 111, 386, 387,
412 and 507 of the • Provided the
IPC and Sections 25 pen and paper
and 27 of the Arms used for
Act, 1959 added later preparing the
on), registered at extortion slips.
Police Station Gohana • A notebook
City, District Sonepat. recovered from
him contained
imprints of the
7 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -8-
and other connected matters.
CRM- RAM FIR No.23 dated same message
M- DINESH V/S 21.01.2024, under used at the
50788- STATE OF Section(s) 307 and 34 crime scene.
2025 HARYANA of the Indian Penal • Conducted recce
Code, 1860, (Sections of the target
120-B, 109 and 111 of location prior to
the IPC and Sections the incident.
25 and 27 of the Arms
Act, 1959 added later • Assisted in
on), registered at procuring the
Police Station Gohana motorcycle used
City, District Sonepat. in the
commission of
the offence.
2 CRM- DIPIN V/S FIR No.22 dated • Participated in
M- STATE OF 21.01.2024, under the planning
53718- HARYANA Section(s) 285, 307, meeting held at
2025 384, 506 and 34 of the the residence of
Indian Penal Code, Ramdinesh.
1860, (Sections 120-
B, 109, 111, 386, 387, • Assisted in
412 and 507 of the drafting the
IPC and Sections 25 extortion slips
and 27 of the Arms demanding Rs.2
Act, 1959 added later crores.
on), registered at • Conducted
Police Station Gohana surveillance
City, District Sonepat. (recce) of
Maturam shop
prior to the
incident.
CRM- DIPIN V/S FIR No.23 dated • Guided the
M- STATE OF 21.01.2024, under assailants
50191- HARYANA Section(s) 307 and 34 regarding entry
2025 of the Indian Penal and exit routes.
Code, 1860, (Sections • Assisted in
120-B, 109 and 111 of procuring the
the IPC and Sections motorcycle used
25 and 27 of the Arms in the
Act, 1959 added later commission of
on), registered at the offence.
Police Station Gohana
City, District Sonepat.
8 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -9-
and other connected matters.
3 CRM- ANKIT FIR No.23 dated • Conducted recce
M- ALIAS 21.01.2024, under along with co-
52858- GURU V/S Section(s) 307 and 34 accused Rohit.
2025 STATE OF of the Indian Penal
HARYANA Code, 1860, (Sections • Assisted Raman
120-B, 109 and 111 of in delivering the
the IPC and Sections stolen car used
25 and 27 of the Arms in the
Act, 1959 added later commission of
on), registered at the offence.
Police Station Gohana • Facilitated
City, District Sonepat. transfer of
extortion money
as part of the
CRM- ANKIT @ FIR No.22 dated conspiracy.
M- GURU V/S 21.01.2024, under
54192- STATE OF Section(s) 285, 307,
2025 HARYANA 384, 506 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code,
1860, (Sections 120-
B, 109, 111, 386, 387,
412 and 507 of the
IPC and Sections 25
and 27 of the Arms
Act, 1959 added later
on), registered at
Police Station Gohana
City, District Sonepat.
4 CRM- RAHUL FIR No.22 dated • Owner/driver of
M- TOMAR V/S 21.01.2024, under the Scorpio
54511- STATE OF Section(s) 285, 307, vehicle used for
2025 HARYANA 384, 506 and 34 of the transporting
Indian Penal Code, weapons.
1860, (Sections 120-
B, 109, 111, 386, 387, • Accompanied
412 and 507 of the co-accused
IPC and Sections 25 Harvinder and
and 27 of the Arms Raman to
Act, 1959 added later deliver weapons
on), registered at to Rohit.
Police Station Gohana • Assisted in
City, District Sonepat. transferring
extortion
money.
9 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -10-
and other connected matters.
CRM- RAHUL FIR No.23 dated
M- TOMAR V/S 21.01.2024, under
54196- STATE OF Section(s) 307 and 34
2025 HARYANA of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, (Sections
120-B, 109 and 111 of
the IPC and Sections
25 and 27 of the Arms
Act, 1959 added later
on), registered at
Police Station Gohana
City, District Sonepat.
5 CRM- YASH ALIAS FIR No.22 dated • Associated with
M- PANDU V/S 21.01.2024, under co-accused
56063- STATE OF Section(s) 285, 307, through
2025 HARYANA 384, 506 and 34 of the Lakshay (cousin
Indian Penal Code, of Sahil).
1860, (Sections 120-
B, 109, 111, 386, 387, • Roommate of
412 and 507 of the accused Rahul
IPC and Sections 25 during college.
and 27 of the Arms • Engaged in
Act, 1959 added later communication
on), registered at with other
Police Station Gohana accused persons
City, District Sonepat. involved in the
offence.
• Assisted in
transferring
CRM- YASH ALIAS FIR No.23 dated money related
M- PANDU V/S 21.01.2024, under to the incident.
56021- STATE OF Section(s) 307 and 34 • Allegedly
2025 HARYANA of the Indian Penal involved in
Code, 1860, (Sections other criminal
120-B, 109 and 111 of cases.
the IPC and Sections
• Recovery of
25 and 27 of the Arms
mobile phone
Act, 1959 added later
and ₹4,000/-
on), registered at
from his
Police Station Gohana
possession.
City, District Sonepat.
7 Counsel for the petitioners contend that in the aforesaid incident
10 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -11-
and other connected matters.
of firing at the shop of complainant Neeraj Gupta resulting in FIR No.22, one
Bijender had also suffered injuries for which a separate FIR No.23 dated
21.01.2024 under Sections 307 and 34 of the IPC (Section 120-B, 109 and
111 of IPC and Sections 25 and 29 of the Arms Act, added later on) was also
registered at Police Station Gohana City, District Sonepat.
8 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner(s) submit
that the petitioners have been in custody since April/May 2024 and have
undergone an actual custody of nearly 02 years. It is further contended that
the trial has made negligible progress. In FIR No. 22 dated 21.01.2024, out of
a total of 84 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined so
far, whereas in FIR No. 23 dated 21.01.2024, out of 45 witnesses, only five
witnesses have been examined till date. Learned counsel further submit that
none of the petitioners, except Rukumuddin, are involved in any other
criminal case apart from the instant two FIRs. Insofar as petitioner
Rukumuddin is concerned, it is stated that he had been nominated as an
accused in FIR No. 266 registered at Police Station Sadar, Gohana, however,
he has already been acquitted in the said case vide judgment dated 17.12.2022.
9 It is contended that the petitioner(s) herein are alleged to be the
co-conspirators in the incident of firing at the shop of Neeraj Gupta
(complainant in FIR No.22) wherein the victim Bijender was incidentally
caught in the cross-fire as he attempted to enter into the shop. The petitioner
herein never actually participated in the act of firing at the spot. It is further
contended that at the time of the incident, the petitioners were of young age.
Petitioner Yash @ Pendu was about 18 years, petitioner Rahul about 19 years,
petitioner Ankit @ Guru about 20 years, petitioner Deepak about 23 years and
11 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -12-
and other connected matters.
petitioner Ram Dinesh was about 28 years of age. It is further submitted that
even though it is alleged that some of the petitioners assisted in handling
extortion money, however, the FIR does not disclose that any extortion money
was ever paid. Besides, no ransom money, if any, has ever been recovered.
There is also no description of the day, month, year, time or the amount which
was allegedly paid.
10 Learned counsel submits that, keeping in view the youthful age
of the petitioners, their clean criminal antecedents, and the absence of any
direct role attributed to them in the commission of the overt act of firing or
for seeking ransom coupled with the stage of the trial and the period of custody
already undergone, the petitioners deserve to be considered for the grant of
concession of regular bail.
11 Learned state counsel, on the other hand, contends that the
petitioners have been found to be co-conspirators acting in concert with the
main accused, and that they were actively involved in extending assistance in
the execution of the offence, including the firing of the gun shots at the
premises of complainant Neeraj Gupta. It is contended that during the course
of the occurrence, approximately 50 rounds were fired and a ransom demand
of Rs.2 crores was also raised on behalf of Himanshu @ Bhau and that in a
social media post, the above gang had also undertaken responsibility of the
said incident. It is also pointed out that one of the persons present at the spot,
namely Bijender, sustained injuries in the said firing incident, in respect of
which a separate FIR has been registered. It is further contended that since the
petitioners had extended logistical and operational support to the main
accused, their role cannot be treated as peripheral.
12 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -13-
and other connected matters.
12 Learned state counsel, however, does not dispute the period of
custody undergone by the petitioners, the lack of criminal antecedents apart
from present incident as well as absence of any substantive recovery from the
petitioners except for certain cash and mobiles. It is also fairly conceded that
neither the weapons used in the commission of the offence nor the vehicles
involved in the occurrence were recovered pursuant to the disclosure
statements from the present petitioners.
13 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the nature of allegations against the petitioners, the role
attributed to them, the absence of criminal antecedents; the period of actual
custody of nearly 02 years and the fact that no substantive recovery of
weapons or vehicles used in the incident has been effected either from the
possession of the petitioners or pursuant to their disclosure statements, I deem
it appropriate to allow the present petitions. Accordingly, the present petitions
are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their
furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
14 It is made clear that in the event of the petitioners misusing the
concession of bail and on being involved in any other case of such or similar
nature, the State shall be at liberty to move an application seeking cancellation
of bail granted to the petitioners. It is further made clear that the petitioners
shall not extend any threat and shall not influence or intimidate any
prosecution witnesses in any manner, directly or indirectly.
15 The observation made hereinabove shall be not construed as an
expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case
13 of 14
CRM-M-50966-2025 (O&M) -14-
and other connected matters.
on the basis of available material.
16 Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed
of accordingly.
17 A photocopy of the order be placed on the connected file(s).
March 16, 2026. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
raj arora JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
14 of 14
