CRM-M- IN 207 Sandeep Ku Vers State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. 04.12.2023 (Sections 3 District Fa bail. 2. taken from affidavit of II, Faridab -12240-2026 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA eep Kumar @ Sandeep Versus of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Balvinder Sangwan, Advo Mr. Vishal Singh, AAG, Harya Mr. Shivam Grover, Advocate **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, who is an accuse .2023, registered against him under S tions 325, 307, 379B of IPC added la ict Faridabad, has filed the present p Relevant facts necessary for d from para 2 of the status report d avit of Varun Kumar, HPS, Assistant ridabad. The same are reproduced as u “On 30.11.2023, an informati Raj Kumar was lying admitte information from Police Stati 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-12240-2026 Date of Decision: 20.03.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. , Advocate for the petitioner. , Haryana. vocate for complainant. accused in case FIR No. 593 date nder Sections 323, 506, 148, 149 of IP ded later on), at Police Station Dabu esent petition for grant of anticipator y for disposal of this petition are bein port dated 16.3.2026 filed by way o sistant Commissioner of Police, Crim ed as under:- mation was received that Vikas son mitted in Escorts Fortis Hospital. O Station Kotwali, Faridabad, police .2026 dated of IPC Dabua, cipatory re being way of Crime- son of al. On lice of GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- and thus, occurrence. -12240-2026 -2 Police Station Dabua, reache of the injured. The injured statement as he was on ventila initially did not move any a providing treatment to the i Vikas was in ICU, his moth complaint that on 29.11.202 Vikas was present in front of Iqbal and Mohit. Amit along there and asked Vikas as to Police Station Saran. They scuffle with Vikas and intimid Friends of Vikas intervende Banwari and Karan went thereafter, Banwari called his meantime, Chhaliya, Tarun armed with lathi, Danda, rod Chhaliya and Banwari caused Karan, Tarun and Saim inflict the person of his son. The assailants intimidated friends in case, they intervened to sav hospital in order to save him admitted in ICU. Incident wa There are injuries with ‘Sua’ his son and fracture on rig allegations, present FIR No Section 148, 149, 323 & 506 IPC added later on), was reg District Faridabad, Haryana.” Injured, who had suffered mu thus, his statement could not be rrence. Only after seeking permissio 2- ched the hospital and collected ML red was declared unfit to make th ntilator support. The family membe ny application as they were busy he injured. On 04.12.2023, patie mother Jatin Bhatia moved writte .2023 at about 11.30 p.m., her so t of his shop with his friends Raja long with co-accused Banwari cam s to why he had gone with Iqbal hey indulged in hurling abuses an imidated him with dire consequence ended and separated them. Am ent away to a little distance an d his son Vikas for settlement. In th run and Saim along with 4-5 oth , rod and Sua came there and Am used injuries to his son with Sua whi flicted lathi, Danda and rod blows o There was profuse bleeding. Th ends of Vikas with dire consequenc save him. Banwari shifted his son himself whereafter his son was lyin t was told to her by friends of Vika ’ on the chest, stomach and back right foot. On the basis of the No. 593 dated 04.12.2023, und 506 IPC (Sections 325, 307, 379-B s registered at Police Station Dabu na.” ed multiple injuries, was on Ventilato t be recorded immediately after th mission from the Doctor, his stateme MLR ke the mbers usy in atient ritten r son Rajan, came bal to s and ences. Amit, e and In the other Amit, while ws on The ences son to lying Vikas. ack of these under B of abua, entilator fter the atement GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- came to b Yuvraj, Pra had assault fist blows. were also s added. Annexures seriousness 7.12.2023 entire incid came to be order dated filed for gra 3. not named only with a from him (P executed ‘ complainan executed did not part Annexure contends th has also bee -12240-2026 -3 to be recorded on 7.12.2023, whe aj, Pradeep, Pradeep’s brother, Sande ssaulted him with lathies, dandas and lows. He further alleged that his go also snatched. Accordingly, Sectio Copies of the MLR and d xures R-1 and R-2 along with the usness and magnanimity of injuries su Petitioner named by the 2023, as one of the assailants, who e incident, moved an application for to be dismissed by learned Additiona r dated 24.02.2026. Aggrieved of wh for grant of bail. Learned counsel for petitioner amed in the FIR, has been falsely imp with a view to harass him as also to him (P). Realizing his mistake, injure uted ‘Settlement Deed dated 5.2.2026 lainant party is further apparent from uted ‘Settlement Deed dated 5.2.2026 ot participate in the incident. Copy of xure P-4 has also been referred to nds that based on the said settlement d lso been filed, which is pending for ad 3- , wherein he specifically alleged th Sandeep (present petitioner) and othe as and iron rods and also gave slaps an his gold chain, bracelet and Rs.2700 Sections 325, 307, 379-B of IPC we and discharge summary appended a th the status report further reveal th ries suffered by injured Vikas. injured in his statement date , who had actively participated in th n for grant of pre-arrest bail. The sam ditional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, vid which, the present petition has bee itioner contends that petitioner who wa ly implicated at a later stage, by injure also to extract illegal monetary benef injured of his own accord and free wi 2.2026’. Falsity of the case set up t from the fact that the injured himse .2026’ clarifying therein that petition opy of said settlement deed appended a ed to by learned counsel, who furth ment deed, petition for quashing of FI for adjudication before this Court. ed that d others laps and s.2700/- C were nded as veal the t dated in the he same , vide as been ho was injured, benefit free will t up by himself etitioner nded as further of FIR GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- of challan interrogatio him, but be and when facts, it ha arrest bail. 4. and has end State couns into motion the identifi her son. S serious life Doctor had declared ‘ elaborated mentioned him as also two years, jurisdiction unsuccessfu serious inju -12240-2026 -4 It is further the submission of hallan having been filed against rogation of petitioner is not needed, fo being a law abiding citizen, he is w when called for. Thus, when apprecia , it has been prayed that petitioner b t bail. Shri Shivam Grover has appea endorsed the factum of settlement d Per contra, while opposing the counsel contends that criminal procee motion by the mother of injured, who a dentification details of all the assailan . Statement of injured could not us life threatening injuries, was on or had refused to grant permission red ‘fit’, his statement dated 7.12.2 rated upon the sequence of events ioned the names of all the assailants s also the roles played by them. It is further the submission of years, petitioner has been evading a dictional police to join him (P) i ccessful. Learned State counsel next con us injuries suffered by injured, the f 4- ion of learned counsel that in the lig gainst the other accused, custodi ded, for nothing is to be recovered fro is willing to join the investigation a ppreciated in the light of the aforesa oner be granted the concession of pr appeared on behalf of the complaina ment deed. ing the request for grant of bail, learne proceedings in the present case were s who at that time was not fully aware o sailants, who had mercilessly assaulte ld not be recorded as he had suffere as on Ventilator and thus the treatin ission. Soon after he (injured) wa 7.12.2023 was recorded, wherein h vents leading to the incident as als ants who had unleashed brutal attack o of learned counsel that for the la ding arrest and the best efforts of th (P) in investigation have remaine ext contends that in the light of multip the fact that petitioner has not eve the light ustodial ed from ation as foresaid of pre- plainant learned were set ware of ssaulted suffered treating was rein he as also ttack on the last of the emained multiple ot even GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- joined the outcome of not to be ta 5. documents 6. the counse Supreme C application 7. The State Supreme C ought not t Supreme C Live Law ( -12240-2026 -5 d the investigation, it is apparent that me of coercion/pressure exerted upo o be taken note of. Dismissal of the pe Heard learned counsel for th ments on record. Before expressing any opinio ounsels, it would be appropriate to r eme Court, wherein the factors to be k cation for grant of anticipatory bail, ha In Nikita Jagganath Shetty @ tate of Maharashtra and another, eme Court held that “Anticipatory ba not to be granted in a routine manne It would also be appropriate to eme Court in Sumitha Pradeep Vs. aw (SC) 870, wherein it was held as “It may be true, as appearing for Respondent No been filed. It will be unfair Investigating Officer does n custodial interrogation for the Be that as it may, e Respondent No.1 is not requir are satisfied that the High C discretionary relief of anticipa We are dealing with complainant (appellant herei praying that the anticipatory b the accused should be cancel 5- nt that the said ‘Settlement Deed’ is a d upon the injured and, thus, deserve the petition has been prayed for. for the parties and have perused th opinion on submissions raised by bo te to refer to the judgment of Hon’b o be kept in mind while dealing with a ail, have been discussed. etty @ Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v her, 2025 AIR SC 3375, the Hon’b ry bail is an exceptional remedy an nner.” riate to refer to the judgment of Hon'b Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr. 202 eld as follows:- as pointed out by learned couns t No.1, that charge-sheet has alread fair to presume on our part that th s not require Respondent No.1 fo r the purpose of further investigation y, even assuming it a case whe quired for custodial interrogation, w gh Court ought not to have grante icipatory bail. ith a matter wherein the origin herein) has come before this Cou ory bail granted by the High Court ncelled. To put it in other words, th is an eserves sed the by both Hon’ble with an av vs. Hon’ble y and Hon'ble . 2022 ounsel lready at the .1 for ation. where on, we ranted iginal Court urt to s, the GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. have alread assaulted criminal sequence assaulters k -12240-2026 -6 complainant says that the H discretion while granting anti very serious crime like POCSO by the High Court granting should be quashed and set a matters, we have noticed canvassed that no custodial therefore, anticipatory bail m be a serious misconception of interrogation is made out by would be a good ground to g interrogation can be one considered along with othe application seeking anticipato in which the custodial interro required, but that does not against the accused should b should be granted anticipato thing that the court hearing should consider is the prima accused. Thereafter, the natur into along with the severity interrogation can be one of interrogation. However, even required or necessitated, by it anticipatory bail.” Factual aspects of the case lea already been noticed in para 2 of the by petitioner and the other acc law in motion by filing a co of events that had unfolded at lters known to her. According to h 6- e High Court wrongly exercised i anticipatory bail to the accused in CSO and, therefore, the order passe ting anticipatory bail to the accuse set aside. In many anticipatory ba ced one common argument bein dial interrogation is required an il may be granted. There appears n of law that if no case for custodi t by the prosecution, then that alon to grant anticipatory bail. Custodi ne of the relevant aspects to b other grounds while deciding a patory bail. There may be many cas errogation of the accused may not b not mean that the prima facie ca ld be ignored or overlooked and h ipatory bail. The first and foremo ring an anticipatory bail applicatio rima facie case put up against th ature of the offence should be looke erity of the punishment. Custodi of the grounds to decline custodi even if custodial interrogation is n by itself, cannot be a ground to gra leading to the registration of the FI the order. Injured had been brutal accused. His mother had set complaint mentioning therein at the site and had named some g to her, the boy had been repeated ed its d in a assed cused y bail being and, ars to todial alone todial to be g an cases not be case nd he emost cation st the looked todial todial is not grant FIR brutally the the some of peatedly GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- stabbed by As a conse fractures et the treating injuries on ferocity of on Ventilat Only after, wherein he Even the investigatio the last tw challan has -12240-2026 -7 ed by the accused and had been give consequence thereof, he suffered m etc. At this stage, it would be wo eating Doctor in the MLR mentioning ies on the person of injured, which ity of the attack. The report is reprodu “Punctured/penetrating wound and 0.5 right to left mid clavic Punctured wound/penetrating below and 3 cm right to left m Punctured wound/penetrating upper outer quadrant of left gl Superficial linear/incised wou right costal margin, extendin (tolling) to 3 cm left to umbilic Superficial liner incised woun costal margin, extending 3 cm 5 cm right to left mid clavicula Superficial linear incised wou nipple in mid clavicular line. Swelling and tenderness right Admittedly, injured needed su entilator for few days. He was in a after, he was declared ‘fit’, that his ein he mentioned the name of present the CCTV footage collected by tigation endorses the said statement o ast two and half years, petitioner has an has been filed against the other ac 7- give blows with iron rods, dandas et red multiple serious injuries includin be worth referring to the note made b ioning therein the number and nature o which would give an idea about th eproduced hereinbelow:- ound of size 0.5 x 0.3 cm, 1 cm abov lavicular line, ting wound of size 0.7 x 0.4 cm, 8 c ft mid clavicular line ting wound of size 0.5 x 0.3 cm o eft gluteal region. wound of size 1.5 cm, 6 cm belo nding from right mid clavicular lin bilicus. wound of size 8 cm, 5 cm below le 3 cm left to left mid clavicular line t icular line (talling). wound of size 2 cm, 6 cm below le ne. ight foot. surgical intervention and remaine s in a very delicate medical conditio his statement came to be recorde resent petitioner as one of the assailant d by the IO during the course o ent of the injured dated 7.12.2023. Fo er has been at large. Simply, becaus ther accused would not be a ground das etc. cluding ade by ature of out the above , 8 cm cm on below r line w left ine till w left emained ndition. ecorded, sailants. urse of . For because ound in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- itself to tak complete li enabled him the compla discussion brought on of undue i Thus, this custodial in him in the the injured 9. accompanie opinion tha depravity o grant of pre 10. 20.03.2026 gbs -12240-2026 -8 to take a lenient view in favour of the lete liberty and unwarranted space by led him (P) to interact with approach a omplainant party to sign the so call ssion made hereinabove, the facts ght on record, the so called ‘Settlemen ndue influence/intimidation exerted b , this Court does not deem it approp dial interrogation of petitioner is need in the commission of offence as also t jured. In view of submissions adv mpanied by learned counsel for the ion that petitioner has not been able t avity or hardship in his favour entitling t of pre-arrest bail. The petition being devoid of a .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 8- of the petitioner, who has been allowe ace by the Investigating Agency, whic oach and ultimately exert pressure upo so called ‘Settlement Deed’. From th facts and connecting circumstance ement Deed’ appears to be an outcom rted by the petitioner on the injure appropriate to take note of it. Furthe s needed to recover the weapon used b also to recover the snatched articles o s advanced by learned State couns r the complainant, the Court is of th able to make out a case of exception ntitling him this extra ordinary relief o id of any merit is hereby dismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No allowed , which re upon rom the stances utcome injured. Further, used by ticles of counsel s of the eptional relief of NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.30 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document