Sonu vs State Of Haryana
2026 Latest Caselaw 5078 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sonu vs State Of Haryana on 22 May, 2026

Author: Rajesh Bhardwaj

Bench: Rajesh Bhardwaj

                     CRM-M-28038-2026                       -1-

                     215         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                          AT CHANDIGARH
                                                       CRM-M-28038-2026
                                                       Date of Decision: 22.05.2026
                     Sonu                                           ..... Petitioner
                                          Versus
                     State of Haryana                              .......Respondent
                     CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
                     Present:     Mr. Chahit Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
                                  Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.
                     Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the

present petition praying for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.87 dated

15.03.2024, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, at

Police Station Civil Lines, Sirsa.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case is that the FIR was lodged on

the statement of the complainant -Ankush. It was alleged that he had

friendship with Harsh since childhood and they are on visiting terms with

each other and Harsh told him that his friend Jasbir Nagar can secure a job

for him in Railway Department as he had good acquaintance in Railway

Department and his relatives are also serving in Railway Department.

Thereafter, Jaibir asked the complainant and his father that for securing job,

about 6,00,000/- to 7,00,000/- have to be paid to the officers. At different

times complainant and his father paid a sum of 6,50,000/- in total to Jaibir

and further when the complainant alongwith his father and Harsh visited at

the house of Jaibir and his brother Raj Kumar, they got furious and

threatened them not to visit their house again, failing which they have to

face the dire consequences. They further stated that they have duped many

persons in the name of securing job for them but those persons could not

trouble them. They further stated that they have also duped the complainant

stating that he can do whatever he can. Hence, the complainant got lodged

the present FIR. Investigation commenced. During investigation, the

involvement of petitioner in this case surfaced as he obtained Rs.22,000/-

from accused Jaibir. Thus, the petitioner was also arrayed as an accused and

resultantly, he was arrested on 31.07.2025. On completion of the

investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, trial

commenced. The petitioner approached learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Amritsar praying for grant of bail, however, finding no merit, application

was declined after hearing both the sides by learned Court vide order dated

18.04.2026. Hence, aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court by

way of filing of present petition for grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, prays for the

grant of bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the co-

accused, namely, Balbir Singh. He has drawn the attention of this Court to a

common order dated 01.04.2026 passed in CRM-M-11730-2026, whereby,

co-accused Balbir Singh, has been granted regular bail by this Court. He

submits that on the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted

bail as the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said co-accused, who

has already been granted bail.

4. Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of bail

to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied that the

petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Balbir Singh. On

instructions, he submits that out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, 04

witnesses remain to be examined. He has placed on record the custody

certificate of the petitioner.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the

record, it is deciphered that the petitioner was arrested in this case on

31.07.2025. Co-accused, namely, Balbir Singh is stated to be on regular bail

and case of the petitioner is at par with that of the co-accused. Custody

certificate of the petitioner shows that the petitioner has suffered

incarceration of 09 months & 20 days as on 20.05.2026. It further reflects

that the petitioner is facing prosecution in two other cases, however, he is on

bail in one case.

6. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the

conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both

the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from

commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will

take sufficient long time. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the

sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that learned

counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular

bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity.

7. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is

ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

8. It is being clarified that in case the petitioner does not furnish

bail/surety bonds within a period of one week from today, his custody will

not be counted in the present case after one week.

9. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion

on the merits of the case.

                                                                       (RAJESH BHARDWAJ)
                     22.05.2026                                              JUDGE
                     sharmila            Whether Speaking/Reasoned :      Yes/No
                                         Whether Reportable        :      Yes/No