Wasim Ahmed @ Vaseem Ahmad vs State Of Haryana

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -1-



IN THE HIGH OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

221
CRM-M-54392-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 02.11.2026


WASIM AHMED @ VASEEM AHMAD

...Petitioner

Versus


STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEERJA K. KALSON

Present:- Mr. Samay Sandhawalia, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG., Haryana.

*

NEERJA K. KALSON, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439
Cr.P.C.), seeking grant of regular bail in FIR No. 134 dated 14.07.2026
(Annexure P-1), registered at Police Station Rojka Meo, District Nuh, under
Sections 191(3), 191(2), 121(1), 132, 221 and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 148, 147, 332, 353, 186 and 307
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -2-
IPC, respectively).
2. The prosecution case, as emerging from the FIR, is
reproduced hereunder:-
“To, the SHO, P.S. Rojka Meow, 'Jai Hind'. Today, I, PSI
along with accompanying officials L/HC Monika No.131/Nuh,
Ct. Pawan No.963/Nuh, Ct. Ashish No.888/Nuh, Ct. Anil
No.550/Nuh, Ct. Sunil No.5/245/Nuh, Ct. Rahul No. 1343/KNL,
Ct. Pradeep No.1346/KNL, HGH Soyab No.263 in official
vehicle bearing No.HR-27-GV-9238, driver of which was Ct.
Jai Bhagwan and in official vehicle bearing No.HR-27-GV-
7469, driver of which was HGH Abid No.709/Nuh, reached the
spot in Village Kanwarsikka, pursuant to the order received
from the Hon'ble Civil Judge (Junior Division) vide order
No.1A-1-2026 CM-122-2026 'JAN MOHD. VS JANWAL etc. at
the police station regarding verifying the CURRENT STATUS
ALLEGED CONSTRUCTION AT THE SUIT LAND, where it
was found that construction work is being carried out by
Jaikam son of Azmat, resident of Kanwarsika, where shuttering
were found to be installed at the house and work was ongoing.
Persons present at the spot were explained about the stay order
issued by the Hon'ble Cour against the said property and that a
status report regarding this matter is to be submitted in Court
tomorrow on 15.07.2026. Therefore, no new construction work
is to be carried out at the spot. Angered by this, Amir, Sameer,
Wasim Ahmad sons of Jaikam and Jaikam son of Azmat,
residents of Kanwarsika, P.S. Rojka Meow, District Nuh present
at the spot said that the police are stopping their work, so they
will teach the police a lesson for stopping the work. Upon
which, Amir, Sameer, Wasim Ahmad sons of Jaikam, and
Jaikam son of Azmat, residents of Kanwarrsika, P.S. Rojka
Meow, District Nuh, climbed onto the roofs of nearby houses
and started pelting stones at the police party with intention to
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -3-
kill. Due to the stone pelting carried out by the accused with
intention to kill, the police personnel saved their lives by taking
cover behind walls. Due to this stone pelting, Ct. Pawan
No.963/Nuh sustained injuries, who was sent to CHC Sohna for
medical treatment. Video recording of the entire incident was
done by Ct. Sunil No.5/245 IIAP on his personal phone upon my
instructions. After a long duration of stone pelting, I with the
help. of accompanied officials personnel apprehended Sameer
and Wasim Ahmad sons of Jaikam, residents of Kanwarsika,
P.S. Rojka Meow, Nuh, whereas Amir son of Jaikam and
Jaikam son of Azmat, residents of Kanwarsika, P.S. Rojka
Meow, District Nuh and others managed to flee. Amir, Sameer,
Wasim Ahmed sons of Jaikam and Jaikam son of Azmat,
residents of Kanwarsika, P.S. Rojka Meow, District Nuh by
pelting stones and by obstructing the government work and
attempting to kill the police party have committed offense under
Sections 191(3), 191(2), 121(1), 132, 221, 109 of BNS.
Therefore, after writing ruqa, same is being sent to police
station by hand through Ct. Anil No.550/Nuh for the
registration of an FIR and after registration of FIR, number of
which be informed. Since 1, PSI is the complainant, so some
another investigating officer should be sent to the spot for
further investigation and the special report of the case should
be sent through a special messenger to senior officers. Today:
Within the area of Kanwarsika, P.S. Rojka Meow dated
14.07.2026 at 08:00 PM. Today, on receiving of aforesaid ruqa
at police station written by PSI Sudhir, P.S. Rojka Meow
through Ct. Anil No.550/Nuh, FIR No. 134 dated 14.07.2026
under Sections 191(3), 191(2), 121(1), 132, 221, 109 of BNS
2023 was registered at P.S. Rojka Meow, Nuh. Copies of the
FIR prepared via computer and the special report of the case
through special messenger Ct. Lokesh No.873/Nuh will be sent
via email to the laga Magistrate and senior officers, and is
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -4-
being sent to the higher officers and to the Hon'ble IG Rewari.
I, ASI alongwith accompanying Ct. by taking along the copy of
the police file alongwith the original ruga am moving towards
the place of occurrence for initiating turther proceedings. Note:
This FIR has been registered in the presence of ASI Yogesh
No.62/Nuh.”
3. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that a police party
headed by PSI Sudhir visited Village Kanwarsika pursuant to directions
issued by the competent Civil Court in connection with construction being
carried out over a disputed property. Upon being informed of the Court’s
directions and asked to stop the construction, the petitioner, along with his
father Jekam and brothers Sameer and Amir, is stated to have climbed onto
the rooftops of nearby houses and pelted stones at the police officials. The
prosecution maintains that the assault was carried out with an intention to
kill, compelling the police personnel to take shelter behind walls. Constable
Pawan sustained an injury during the occurrence, which was videographed
by Constable Sunil on his personal mobile phone. The petitioner and co-
accused Sameer were apprehended at the spot, whereas the remaining
accused escaped. The aforesaid occurrence led to the registration of the
present FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the case. It is contended that, notwithstanding
the allegation of collective stone-pelting, no distinct overt act has been
ascribed to him. Particular emphasis is laid on the video recording of the
occurrence, wherein, according to learned counsel, the petitioner is not
visible. It is further argued that the occurrence arose out of a sudden
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -5-
altercation and that the material collected during investigation does not
disclose the requisite intention or knowledge contemplated under Section
109 BNS. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been in
custody since 14.07.2026, the investigation stands concluded and the challan
has been presented. With nine prosecution witnesses cited and the trial yet to
make substantial progress, his continued incarceration is stated to serve no
useful purpose. It is, accordingly, prayed that the petitioner be admitted to
regular bail.
5. Learned State counsel has filed a status report dated
27.10.2026, by way of an affidavit of Surinder Kaur, Deputy Superintendent
of Police, Nuh, on behalf of the respondent-State, which is taken on record.
6. Per contra , learned State counsel opposes the prayer while
submitting that the allegations are severe in nature, emphasising that the
police officials were discharging their lawful duties in compliance with the
directions of a Civil Court when they were subjected to stone-pelting. The
assault, according to the prosecution, was sufficiently grave to compel the
police party to seek cover, besides causing injury to Constable Pawan. It is
further pointed out that the petitioner was apprehended at the spot along with
co-accused Sameer and that the material collected during investigation
implicates him in the occurrence. On these premises, learned State counsel
submits that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession sought.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the
material available on record.
8. The accusation concerns an assault upon police officials who
had proceeded to the spot in the discharge of their official duties. Such
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -6-
conduct, if established, is undoubtedly serious and cannot be viewed lightly.
Nevertheless, the gravity of the charge, though a material consideration,
cannot be regarded as conclusive of the prayer for bail. The nature of the
material collected, the stage of the proceedings and the necessity of further
detention must receive due consideration.
9. The prosecution attributes participation in the stone-pelting to
the petitioner along with the other accused. The defence, however, disputes
his involvement and relies upon the video recording to contend that his
presence in the occurrence is not discernible. The recording has not been
independently evaluated by this Court, and its contents cannot be treated as
establishing the defence version merely on the strength of counsel’s
submission. Equally, the evidentiary value of the disclosure statement relied
upon by the prosecution remains subject to the limitations prescribed by law.
These competing assertions raise questions which must be resolved upon
appreciation of the evidence during trial, rather than by undertaking a
conclusive assessment at the stage of bail.
10. In Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation,
(2012) 1 SCC 40 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated that the object of
bail is to secure the presence of an accused during trial and that pre-trial
detention cannot be employed as a measure of punishment. The necessity of
continued incarceration must, therefore, be assessed with reference to the
legitimate requirements of the criminal proceedings, while maintaining a
proper balance between the seriousness of the accusation and the right to
personal liberty.
11. Upon consideration of the rival submissions, the material
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -7-
available on record and the principles governing the grant of bail, this Court
is inclined to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner for the
following reasons:
(i) The petitioner has remained in custody since 14.07.2026 and
has undergone a considerable period of incarceration.
(ii) The investigation qua the petitioner stands concluded and
the challan has been presented. The prosecution material having
been collected, no further custodial requirement has been
demonstrated by the State.
(iii) As reflected in the status report dated 27.10.2026, charges
had yet to be framed and none of the nine prosecution witnesses
had been examined. The trial was thus at a preliminary stage,
and its conclusion is likely to take considerable time.
(iv) The previous criminal case disclosed by the State, namely
FIR No. 147 dated 01.06.2004, registered at Police Station
Sohna, culminated in the petitioner’s acquittal. No previous
conviction has been brought to the notice of this Court.
(v) The presence of the petitioner during trial can be secured
through appropriate conditions, which would also adequately
safeguard the interests of the prosecution against any
interference with the witnesses or evidence.
12. In view of the foregoing circumstances, considered
cumulatively, this Court finds that further incarceration of the petitioner is
not warranted at this stage. Consequently, the present petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing
adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, subject to his not being required in any
other case.
13. The petitioner shall neither directly nor indirectly influence,
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-54392 of 2026 (O&M) -8-
intimidate or induce any prosecution witness, nor shall he interfere with the
evidence in any manner. He shall appear before the trial Court on every date
fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law.
Any misuse of the concession so granted shall entitle the prosecution to seek
cancellation of bail in accordance with law.
14. Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression
of opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, which shall be adjudicated
independently on the evidence brought before the trial Court.


02.11.2026 (NEERJA K. KALSON)
s.khan
JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.03 17:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document