Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail in Phosphide Poisoning Case; Notes Custody of One Year, Polygraph Findings, and Parity With Co-Accused
Case Name: Raghubir Singh Puri vs. U.T. Chandigarh
Date of Judgment: 01 December 2025
Citation: CRM-M-18436-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj
Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Raghubir Singh Puri, accused of conspiring in the death of Brijesh Negi by alleged administration of aluminium phosphide, holding that the petitioner had been in custody for over a year, had no other criminal involvement, had been found innocent in a polygraph test along with a co-accused, and stood on parity with two co-accused who were already granted bail.
Summary: The FIR alleged that Brijesh Negi fell ill while drinking with the petitioner and two others and later died at the hospital, with CFSL detecting phosphide in the viscera. The prosecution claimed motive arising from a property business dispute. The petitioner argued false implication and relied on polygraph test results conducted at Gandhinagar, where both he and co-accused Rajiv Sardana were found innocent. He also pointed out that co-accused Goldy and Sardana had been granted bail earlier, not only on medical grounds but also on merits.
The State opposed the petition, asserting a stronger motive against the petitioner. However, the custody certificate produced in Court showed incarceration of one year and ten days, with no other criminal case against him. Charges had been framed, and the trial was yet to commence. The Court observed that the veracity of allegations would be assessed only at trial and that it would refrain from commenting on the merits. Considering the period of custody, parity with co-accused, and the polygraph findings, the Court found grounds to extend bail.
Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court. The Court clarified that its observations were confined to bail adjudication and would not prejudice the trial.