3 min readChandigarhNov 14, 2025 12:25 AM IST
First published on: Nov 14, 2025 at 12:25 AM IST
The Punjab and Haryana High Court Thursday granted regular bail to a man, who has been in custody for over six years in connection with a 2019 double murder case registered under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Faridabad.
Allowing fourth bail plea of Surjeet alias Surjeet Mourya, a single bench of Justice Sumeet Goel, observed that prolonged incarceration without conclusion of trial infringes the accused’s right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court noted that despite being in custody since June 26, 2019, the trial had moved slowly, with only 22 out of 34 prosecution witnesses examined so far.
The case was registered on June 13, 2019, after police recovered two bodies from Badwali Lake in Faridabad, a man and a woman whose remains were found stuffed in a bag floating in the water. The FIR was based on a complaint by Vijay alias Chandi, who had first noticed the bodies. A few days later, the woman’s father named Surjeet in a written application to the police.
Surjeet’s counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated because of a suspected affair with the deceased woman. The counsel submitted that the case rested solely on circumstantial evidence and that the key prosecution witnesses had already been examined.
Opposing the plea, the state counsel contended that the allegations were grave and the appellant did not deserve bail. Counsel for the complainant’s family also opposed the application, arguing that the testimony of woman’s father, mother and sister directly implicated Surjeet.
The court, however, found that no material was presented to suggest that the appellant might abscond or interfere with the evidence. Referring to the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra, Justice Goel quoted, “If the State or any prosecuting agency… has no wherewithal to protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial, then it should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious.”
Observing that “every accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty,” the judge said further detention of Surjeet as an undertrial was not justified in the circumstances.
Surjeet had earlier moved three bail pleas — the first dismissed in August 2020, and the subsequent ones withdrawn in March 2023 and January 2024. The court noted that despite its earlier direction to expedite the trial, progress had remained slow.
Granting bail, the court directed Surjeet to furnish surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court and comply with conditions including not tampering with evidence, not committing any offence while on bail, and not changing his phone number without permission.
Justice Goel clarified that the observations in the order would not influence the merits of the ongoing trial.
Observing that “every accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty,” the judge said further detention of Surjeet as an undertrial was not justified in the circumstances. 
Share
