CRM-M-25335- IN THE H (107) PRIYANK YADA STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. H MANISHA BATR 1. The i 482 of Bharatiya grant of anticipato registered under S 2023 (for short “B 2. The a lodged by the com guest accommoda her son. Accus accommodation. H Kumar was also o the night of 18.0 petitioner and 03 -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH YADAV Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the pet Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed b ratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 202 ticipatory bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 326(G), 324(5) and 3(5 ort “BNS”) at Police Station Rajendra The aforementioned FIR was register e complainant Mukesh Devi alleging modation at Village Budhera, Gurugr Accused Chirag had rented a room tion. However, she had got the same also occupying one room in the same 18.04.2026, the accused Chirag nd 03 more persons namely Vishwaje JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-25335-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA the petitioner filed by the petitioner under Section a, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) seeking ut of FIR No.134 dated 22.04.2026 nd 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, jendra Park, District Gurugram. egistered on the basis of a complaint leging that she was running a paying urugram which was looked after by room in her paying guest (PG) same vacated. Gaurav son of Vinod e same accommodation on rent. On hirag accompanied by the present hwajeet, Tushar and Nikhil came to M) 2026 ction king 2026 hita, laint ying er by (PG) inod . On esent to AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.06 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-25335- the room of Gau Tushar, Nikhil an morning and the ro She alleged that fe the room occupie present petitioner, am. On receipt o extinguished with found the petition and shortly therea articles kept in th petitioner alongwi fire and caused los 3. After initiated and are u application for gra of Learned Additio 4. It is a falsely implicated complainant on fir was with the co-ac involvement in the has been utilized sworn an affidavit -2026 (O&M) 2 f Gaurav. They had consumed liqu hil and Vishwajeet had left the room d the room was occupied by the presen that feeling offended due to the fact th ccupied by him, by the complainant tioner, accused Chirag lit fire in the ro ceipt of information, she rushed to t d with the help of fire brigade. On s etitioner and the accused leaving the thereafter smoke was seen coming t in the room had been damaged in t ongwith the co-accused had intentiona sed loss to her, she prayed for taking a After registration of FIR, investig d are underway. Apprehending his a for grant of anticipatory bail, which ha Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram v It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case. He had no mo t on fire. He did not play any role in accused Chirag who has been arre t in the crime. There is delay of 04 da ilized to implicate the petitioner falsel fidavit affirming that it was the latter w d liquor. Gaurav accompanied by room in the wee hours of the next present petition and accused Chirag. fact that he had been made to vacate lainant and in connivance with the the room of Gaurav at about 09:20 d to the spot and the fire was got On seeing the CCTV cameras, she ng the room of Gaurav at 09:20 am ing from room of Gaurav. All the ed in the fire. By alleging that the entionally set her accommodation on king action. vestigation proceedings have been his arrest, the petitioner moved an ich has been dismissed by the Court gram vide order dated 01.05.2026. l for the petitioner that he has been no motive to set the room of the ole in the crime. In fact, the motive en arrested and has admitted his sole 04 days in registration of FIR which r falsely. Even father of Chirag has latter who had ignited fire by using a d by next irag. acate the 9:20 s got , she 0 am l the t the n on been d an ourt been f the otive sole hich has ing a AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.06 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-25335- chips packet and been attributed to investigation. His effected from him. 5. Notic 6. Learn ready to argue the against the petition leaving the room had broken out in his disclosure stat overt act to the pe was ignited with conducting proper no exceptional or that the petition do 7. This C for the parties at co 8. The p ignited fire on the the complainant. Yadav was offend in the same PG a petitioner in the co -2026 (O&M) 3 t and throwing it on the bed of Gaur ted to him. His antecedents are His custodial interrogation is not r m him. It is, thus, argued that the petit Notice of motion. Learned State counsel has advance ue the matter. It is submitted by her th petitioner. The petitioner alongwith th room of Gaurav at about 09:20 am a out in the said room. The CCTV foota re statement, the co-accused Chirag the petitioner who had thrown a tow with a lighter, in order to aggravate proper investigation, his custodial inte nal or extra-ordinary ground for grant tion does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner in connivance with the on the bed of Gaurav who was a tenan nant. This act is alleged to have bee offended with the complainant as she h PG accommodation. As per the a the conspiracy. The petitioner might Gaurav. No specific overt act had s are clean. He is ready to join s not required. No recovery is to be e petition deserves to be allowed. vance notice of the petition and is her that there are serious allegations with the co-accused Chirag was seen am and immediately thereafter fire footage has shown his presence. In hirag Yadav has attributed specific a towel on the bed wherein the fire gravate the impact of the fire. For al interrogation is required. There is grant of bail. It is, therefore, argued ubmissions made by learned counsel ith the co-accused is alleged to have tenant in the PG accommodation of ve been done as co-accused Chirag s she had made him vacate his room the allegations, he had joined the might not have any direct motive to t had join to be d is tions seen r fire e. In cific fire For re is gued unsel have on of hirag room the ve to AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.06 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-25335- commit the subjec of subject offence from the allegatio case is at its nasce investigation in th Even otherwise, th of pre-arrest bai circumstances and custodial interroga that shall leave ma investigation. The does not operate a trial Court. Takin the considered opi the same is dismis 8. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 9. Since any, is rendered in 05.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 subject offences, however, his active i ffences in connivance with the co-accu legations as levelled against him whic nascent stage. For the purpose of co n in the matter, the custodial interroga ise, the well settled proposition of la st bail are to be exercised in ex es and no such circumstance has been terrogation of the petitioner is denied ave many glaring loopholes and gaps, t The Court is also required to see th erate as inroad in the normal legal proc Taking into consideration the above d ed opinion that the petition deserves t dismissed. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable:- Yes/No ctive involvement in the commission accused is prima facie established which are serious in nature. The e of conducting thorough and proper terrogation of the petitioner is must. n of law is that the powers for grant in exceptional and extra-ordinary s been made out in this case. In case denied to the Investigating Agency, gaps, thereby adversely effecting the see that an order of anticipatory bail al procedure of criminal cases by the bove discussed facts, this Court is of erves to be dismissed. Accordingly, vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE oned:- Yes/No es/No ssion ished The roper ust. grant inary case ency, g the bail y the is of ly, y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.06 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.