‘Presence not culpability’: Why Punjab and Haryana High Court bailed an accused in a farmhouse attack case
Punjab and Haryana High Court bail order latest news: The Punjab and Haryana High Court was hearing the plea of a man seeking bail who was allegedly involved in a group violence resulting in the death of the complainant’s father.
4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jan 30, 2026 09:07 AM IST
Punjab and Haryana high court news: The Punjab and Haryana High Court noted the complainant’s claim that the accused attempted to force his family out of the farmhouse. (Image is created using AI)
Punjab and Haryana high court news: The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently granted bail to an accused in a man’s death arising out of alleged group violence, observing that individual roles must be “specifically established” and that mere presence at the scene of the crime cannot impose the same level of “culpability” on all accused.
Justice Manisha Batrawas hearing the plea of a man seeking bail in a case where he, along with other co-accused, was charged in connection with an alleged assault on the complainant’s family members.
Justice Manisha Batra found that the case of the petitioner was on a better footing than that of the other co-accused, who had already been granted the benefit of bail. (Image is enhanced using AI)
The complainant’s father later succumbed to the injuries allegedly sustained during the incident.
“In case of group violence, individual roles must be specifically established, and mere presence at the scene of crime cannot impute the same level of culpability to all accused. The absence of such specific evidence militates against the denial of bail,” the court said.
The high court granted bail to the petitioner, in its January 23 order, on the condition of furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Group Violence Case: Farmhouse Attack Background (Oct 2023)
Alleged Unlawful Assembly and Attack
Petitioner and co-accused allegedly formed unlawful assembly, attacked complainant's family with rods and dandas with intent to force them to vacate farmhouse. Father succumbed to injuries in hospital.
Weapons Used
Rods and dandas during attack
Video Recording
Sisters recorded, clothing torn
Theft Alleged
Rs 20,000 and articles taken
Fatal Outcome
Father died from injuries
Agricultural Dispute
Complainant filed complaint against accused for letting cattle stray into fields, causing crop loss
Political Vendetta
Family didn't vote for accused Rakesh in Panchayat elections, alleged motivation for attack
Express InfoGenIE
Findings
The allegation against the petitioner was that he accompanied the co-accused while going towards the farmhouse in a car.
No specific injury resulting in the death of the complainant’s father or to any other injured person was attributed to the petitioner.
He was not named by the complainant or either of the injured, and the complainant, during his examination, also did not implicate him.
The case of the petitioner was found to be on a better footing than that of the other co-accused, who had already been granted the benefit of bail.
Considering the period of incarceration, the likelihood of the trial taking substantial time, the nature of allegations, and the attendant facts and circumstances, the court held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.
‘No presence on spot’
Senior Advocate Kunal Dawar, arguing for the petitioner, submitted that his client has been falsely involved in the case based on the disclosure statement of a co-accused, which cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence.
Dawar further highlights that his client was neither named in the FIR nor his presence at the spot had been established.
He also emphasised that there was no attribution of any specific overt act or any specific injury in the death of the complainant’s father.
It was further submitted that a false recovery of a baseball bat has been planted upon his client.
The petitioner has been in custody since November 2023, while othe rco-accused have already granted bail.
His client deserves to be given the same benefit, particularly when his detention would not serve any useful purpose.
‘Assault followed by death’
The complainant’s counsel, advocate Shreya Bublani, along with the complainant’s counsel, argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner since he, along with the other co-accused, assaulted and injured the complainant’s family members.
They also emphasised that the petitioner, along with other co-accused, had a common object of forming an unlawful assembly, which caused the homicidal death of the complainant’s father
It was further submitted that the allegations are serious in nature, with chances of the petitioner’s absconding.
Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape.
Expertise
Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen.
Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on:
Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.
Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy.
Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More
Justice Manisha Batra found that the case of the petitioner was on a better footing than that of the other co-accused, who had already been granted the benefit of bail. (Image is enhanced using AI)
