Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kunal vs State Of Haryana on 6 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-67766-2025
Date of decision: 06.04.2026
AKASH ..PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA
H ..RESPONDENT
CRM-M-13563-2026
DARSHAN SINGH @ VICKY ..PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA ..RESPONDENT
CRM-M-1800-2026
KUNAL ..PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA ..RESPONDENT
CRM-M-71717-2025
NAVEEN KUMAR ALIAS NAVEEN ..PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA ..RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM-M-67766
67766-2025.
Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM-M-13563
13563-2026.
Mr. Sahil Choudhary, Advocate
POONAM SHARMA
2026.04.08 10:40
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
CRM--M-66849-2025 -2-
CRM--M-13563-2026
CRM--M-1800-2026
CRM--M-71717-2025
for the petitioner in CRM-M-1800
1800-2026.
Mr. Mannat Sibal, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM-M-71717
71717-2025.
Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. AG, Haryana.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL)
1. Th order shall dispose of CRM This CRM-M-13563-2026, CRM-M--
71717-2025
2025 and CRM-M-1800-2026
CRM as the ppetitions
etitions are interconnected and have arisen out of the same FIR. However, the lead case is CRM CRM-M-66849--
2025.
2. The instant petitionss have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail in case FIR No.150, dated 06.04.2024, registered under Sections 365, 34 IPC (Section 364A, 452, 386, 148, 149, 120-B 120 B IPC added later on) and Secti Section on 25 of Arms Act at Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula.
3. Incident took place on 06.04.2024, at about 9:30 PM, when the complainant-Rishi Rishi Pal was taking meal at his home. As per the allegations, 7/8 boys entered the house and by showing pi pistol-like like weapons, sticks and rods, kidnapped him from there and forcibly put him inside a Mahindra XUV-500 500 car bearing registration No. HR26 HR26-CD-1731 1731 of silver colour. At the time of occurrence, Manjit Kaur and Ashok Kumar were also sitting there. It is further rther alleged that the accused had reached the house of the POONAM SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM--M-66849-2025 -3- CRM--M-13563-2026 CRM--M-1800-2026 CRM--M-71717-2025 complainant in three vehicles the aforesaid XUV XUV-500, 500, a Swift (black colour) and a Verna (white colour).
colour). After kidnapping the complainant, they proceeded towards Panchkula-Zirakpur Panchkula Zirakpur Highway. Thereafter, the complainant was taken to some deserted place, where the accused person started demanding money from him. It is also mentioned in the FIR that while the complainant was being kidnapped, the accused persons were calling each other by their names and therefore the complainant came to know of two names, namely Anmol and Ankit. Subsequently, Manjit Kaur was called upon by the accused persons and ransom amount of Rs. 25,00,000/-- was demanded from her, if she wanted to see the complainant alive. Later on, after about 2 ½ hours, the complainant was dropped near Section Section-21, 21, Tau Devi Lal Stadium, Panchkula, after receipt of the ransom amount.
4. Counsel argues es that the co co-accused accused Ankit and his family members were known to Manjit Kaur Kaur, who is the one of the material witness in the present case and to whom, alleged ransom was made,, while the complainant was kidnapped and being taken towards Panchkula side. It is i also been pointed out that one FIR No. 159 dated 28.12.2021 .2021 registered under Sectionss 376, 511, 354 (A) 506, 120-B B IPC Police Station Women, Panchkula was registered at the instance of Manjit Kaur against Sanjiv Kumar ((Maternal uncle of co-accused POONAM SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM--M-66849-2025 -4- CRM--M-13563-2026 CRM--M-1800-2026 CRM--M-71717-2025 Ankit Giri), Sunita Giri (Mother of co co-accused accused Ankit Giri) and Kulwant Kaur (Maternal Grandmother Grandmother of co co-accused Ankit Giri).
5. From bail order of co-accused accused Ankit Gir Giri facts therein also acknowledged.
acknowledged A cancellation report dated 25.08.2022 was submitted in the case FIR No. 159, dated 28.12.2021(supra). Therefore, as pointed out by the learned counsel also, the instant FIR is got registered for taking revenge primarily against the family members ers of co-accused co accused Ankit Giri, bby y concocting the version of kidnapping.
6. As per case of the prosecution all the aforementioned accused (1)Akash, (2)Naveen, (3)
3) Kunal) have been involved in the present case only only on the basis of disclosure statement of the other accused. However, no active role was assigned to them either in the FIR or in any other statement of the witnesses. In fact the allegations which come up against all the petitioners herein states that the they y all were joining the unlawful lawful assembly with the other accused. Qua petitioner Darshan it is pointed out he is inside the jail for a period period of about 8 months and was made accused after a period of 15 months of the alleged incident that too on the basis of some recording on the CCTV footage. POONAM SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM--M-66849-2025 -5- CRM--M-13563-2026 CRM--M-1800-2026 CRM--M-71717-2025
7. Counsel for petitioner ffurther urther argues that out 28 prosecution witnesses only 6 have been examined till date and 3 has given up. Another fact apprised to the Court that except of accused Naveen all other three petitioners herein are being prosecuted on the Naveen, basis of supplementary challan.
c Out of 28 prosecution witnesses only 6 of them have have been examined till date and three were given up. Admittedly, petitioner Akash who is inside the jail since 1 year 4 months. Petitioner-Naveen Petitioner Naveen for 1 year 10 months and 15 days days..
Petitioner Darshan for the last more than period of 8 months and Kunal 1 year, year 10 months and 18 days . As disclosed herein herein, major number of witnesses are yet to be examined whereas other co co-accused accused namely Arun Beniwal @ Arun @ Jagira and Ankit Giri have already been released relea on bail byy this Order vide order dated 20 20.11.2025.
8. Looking at the facts as narrated and recorded herein, also some of the facts being noticed in the bail order dated 20.11.2025 20.11.2025, this his Court does not find that petitioners can be detained inside side the jail for an indefinite period as the conclusion trial is likely to take considerable time.
Thus, considering the tota totality lity of circumstances, custody period and the progress of trial, including the fact that their further detention will not serve any useful purpose, this court is satisfied that POONAM SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM--M-66849-2025 -6- CRM--M-13563-2026 CRM--M-1800-2026 CRM--M-71717-2025 a case for grant of regular bail is made out.
Consequently, prayer made in the present petitions are allowed. Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, subject to their furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.
Needless to observe that the petitioners shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.
The observation made here here-in-above above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts ooff the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record.
Petitions stand disposed of.
Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
April 06, 2026 JUDGE
Poonam Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
POONAM SHARMA
2026.04.08 10:40
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document