Amarjeet Singh vs State Of Haryana

Sanjay Vashisth, J

1.The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name of Petitioner(s)

FIR No

Date

Section(s)

Police Station

District

Amarjeet Singh, aged about 34 years

71

30.05.2025

109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 333 of BNS

Jakhal

Fatehabad

Complainant namely Sunder Lal alias Jagga, who is running a tyre puncture shop, got registered the FIR, which reads as under:-

"I have a tyre puncture shop in my village. We are four brothers and two sisters, all are married and live separately. I have one son Manant and one daughter Janant both are twins, aged about years. Both my children study in Government School. Today, dated 30.05.2025, both my children went to school and I went to the brick kiln. My wife Binder Kaur was alone at home. When I came back home at about 11:00 AM after delivering ₹30,000 to the brick kiln at Aliser, I heard the screams of my wife Binder Kaur. I ran inside the house and saw that Amarjeet son of Desh Raj, resident of Shakarpura, was holding an iron sickle ("daat") in his hand and was attacking my wife with that sickle. My wife was lying on the floor. As soon as he saw me, he started running away. When I tried to catch him, he came toward me with the iron sickle, so I moved back and shouted loudly for help, "Save me, save me." Then Amarjeet jumped over the back wall of my house and ran away along with the weapon. I immediately lifted my wife Binder Kaur, who was lying on the floor, and noticed deep injury wounds on her head, right ear, left elbow, right wrist, left-hand fingers, and arm. On hearing my cries, nearby villagers also reached the spot. I arranged for a private vehicle and took my wife Binder Kaur to Government Hospital, Tohana, for treatment. After dressing the wounds, the doctor referred my wife to Agroha Medical College for further treatment. Presently, my wife Binder Kaur is undergoing treatment at Agroha Medical College. I had kept ₹1,50,000 (one lakh fifty thousand) at my house in the trunk (dholu), and my wife's gold earrings are also missing. Amarjeet son of Desh Raj, resident of Shakarpura, attacked my wife Binder Kaur with a sharp iron sickle with the intent to kill her. Strict legal action be taken against him. Statement has been written, read over, and explained, found correct and signed below. Sd/- Sunder Lal Attested: Manjeet, ASI, In-charge Police Post Meond Dated: 30.05.2025."

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the sole accused in the present case, who allegedly caused injuries to the complainant's wife after entering into the complainant's house. It is further submitted that injured Binder Kaur sustained six injuries, out of which injury No.5 has been declared grievous, while injury No.1 has been opined as dangerous to life; whereas remaining injuries are simple in nature.

On the previous date of hearing, i.e. 28.04.2026, learned trial Court was directed to record the statements of material witnesses, i.e complainant Sunder Lal and the injured witness Binder Kaur.

Today, learned State counsel, upon instructions from ASI Karnail Singh, submits that both the material witnesses, along with one Pala Ram, have since been examined by the trial Court and have fully supported the prosecution case.

This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has carefully perused the record available on file.

In view of the totality of circumstances, nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, and the factors noticed here above, including the fact that out of 18 prosecution witnesses, the material witnesses have already been examined and have supported the prosecution, and there appears to be no likelihood of the petitioner tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and further considering that trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed.

Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his 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 petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

Petition stands disposed of.