CRM-M- IN 104 Satyanaray Vers State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. 21.11.2024 305, 351(3 present peti 2. noticed her Padwan, D complaint received a from that w -61807-2024 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA narayan Versus of Haryana and another AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Joginder Siwach, Advocat (through Video Conferencing) Ms. Shweta Nahatam, DAG, H Mr. Narender Kaajla, Advocat **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, who is an accuse .2024, registered against him under S 351(3) of BNS, at Police Station Bar petition for grant of anticipatory bai Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- Pardeep Kumar, son of Am n, District Charkhi Dadri, set the c int pointing therein that at about 9 d a telephonic call from an unknow at woman in the next 15-20 days. D 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-61807-2024 Date of Decision: 02.02.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondents. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. dvocate for the petitioner ncing). AG, Haryana. dvocate for respondent No.2. accused in case FIR No. 835 date nder Sections 115, 127(2), 190, 191(2 n Barwala, District Hisar, has filed th ory bail. ging from the documents on record b f Amrit Singh, resident of villag the criminal law in motion by filing ut 9.30-10.00 AM on 15.11.2024, h nown woman. He also received cal s. During one such conversation, sh .2026 ents. 5 dated 191(2), filed the cord be illage iling a 24, he d calls n, she GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- questioned has been ru also runs a another da Barwala. which he started tal Raghbir an named Lee any provoc Rs.41,800/ confined transferred released hi consequenc the conseq request to responsible proceeding vide FIR N 127(2), 190 Hisar. grant of pr Additional the same, th -61807-2024 -2 ned him as to how he earns his live en running a Milk Dairy. Surprising ns a dairy in Barwala. He told he dairy. On 15.11.2024, the lady la. When he reached her house, he accepted. When he requested th talking rubbish. In the meanwh ir and a woman arrived. They sto Leela Ram and a woman also came ovocation assaulted him, took the k 800/- lying in the bag in which he in a room from 15.11.2024 rred more than Rs.7 lakhs to the ac d him finally on 17.11.2024, when uences in case he narrated the incid nsequences, however, complainan t to the police authorities to catc sible in the incident as also to dings against them. On the basis IR No. 835 dated 21.11.2024, was , 190, 191(2), 305, 351(3) of BNS, a Apprehending his arrest, peti t of pre-arrest bail. The said applic tional Sessions Judge, Hisar vide orde ame, the present petition has been filed 2- livelihood, when he disclosed that h isingly enough, she disclosed that sh d her that he has been on look out lady called him to see the dairy se, he was offered a glass of wat d the lady to show him the dairy, sh nwhile, a boy named Amit, son y stopped him. Thereafter, a perso came at the spot. All of them, witho the keys of his car and also snatche he also kept cheque book. He wa 24 to 17.11.2024. Accused par e account of Mangal Dairy Farm an hen also he was threatened with di incident to any person. Unmindful inant lodged the complaint with catch hold of all those, who we o to initiate appropriate crimin asis of said complaint, a formal ca was registered under Sections 11 S, at Police Station Barwala, Distri etitioner moved an application fo application was dismissed by learne e order dated 28.11.2024. Aggrieved o n filed for grant of bail. hat he at she out of iry at water y, she son of erson ithout atched e was party m and h dire dful of ith a were iminal l case s 115, istrict tion for learned ieved of GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3. the FIR w Elaborating been alleg complainan house whe today’s age who is a w an unknow house/dairy occurred in family frien going for known to complainan present at t been transf when comp Learned co complainan best known unexplained advanced h story put fo interim bai -61807-2024 -3 Learned counsel for the petitio FIR would reveal the falsity of the orating further, learned counsel conten alleged that after receiving a ca lainant started conversing with her a e where he was kept as hostage and ’s age, it seems highly unbelievable a is a well established in his business w nknown woman and without verifying e/dairy. Further, as per learned cou rred in the manner as portrayed by com ly friend/relative would have accompa g for negotiating a business proposit n to him. Moreover, it also re lainant came to know about the nam nt at the house of said lady. This all transferred in the account of Mangal complainant could not achieve his o ned counsel vehemently contends t lainant, he was released from captivi known, he kept quite for three days plained delay, when appreciated in nced hereinabove, raises a serious que put forth by the prosecution. Learned counsel next conten im bail was granted to the petitioner, h 3- itioner submits that a bare perusal o of the case set up against petitione contends that in the FIR, though it ha a call from an unknown woma her and on her asking, he went to h ge and was not allowed to leave. able and quite improbable that a perso iness would get taken in, in the talks o rifying the facts would visit her at h d counsel, if the incident would hav by complainant, it is expected that som companied him, moreso, when he wa roposition with persons who were n lso remains unexplained as to ho he name of the boy (Amit), who wa his all indicates that in fact money ha angal Dairy for other purpose and lat his object, he concocted a false stor nds that as per the case set up b aptivity on 17.11.2024, but for reason days before lodging of the FIR. Th ted in the light of the submission us question mark on the genuineness o contends that after the concession o oner, he joined investigation. Since, h rusal of titioner. h it has woman, t to her ave. In a person talks of at her ld have at some he was ere not to how ho was ney had nd later e story. up by reasons . This issions eness of sion of ince, he GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- was unable falsely alle Towards th not needed him. Petit exceptional been made. 4. report by w Police, Bar specifically Devi @ San mobile No rented hous from assaul the accoun interim ant name of oth Rs.1000/- Copy of st HDFC Ban substantiate antecedents another ca Sections 11 State coun -61807-2024 -4 unable to fulfil the illegal demands alleging therein that he did not ards the end, learned counsel contends eeded for custodial interrogation, as Petitioner has, thus, been able to m ptional relief of pre-arrest bail. Pray made. Per contra, while opposing th rt by way of affidavit of Sumit Kumar e, Barwala, Hisar, has been filed. ifically pointed out that at the instanc @ Santosh called up complainant on h le No. 8221022120 of petitioner and d house of petitioner, where all accus assaulting him, they also confided him ccount of Mangal Dairy. Further, d im anticipatory bail was granted to p of other accused, who actively partici - recovered out of Rs.1,50,000/ of statement of account (No.50100 C Bank, Barwala Branch has also tantiate this plea. That apart, it has edents of petitioner are also far from er case bearing FIR No. 437, date ons 115, 126, 117(2), 3(5) of BNS, at counsel contends that the matter 4- ands of IO, adverse report was file d not cooperate in the investigatio ntends that the presence of petitioner on, as nothing is to be recovered fro e to make out a case for grant of th Prayer for allowing the petition ha ing the relief sought for, detailed statu Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent o filed. In para 3 thereof, it has bee nstance of petitioner, co-accused Mu nt on his mobile No. 94665-53009 fro and asked him to be present in th l accused were already present. Apa him (c) and transferred Rs.7 lakhs her, despite the fact that concession o d to petitioner, he did not disclose th participated in the incident and got on ,000/- which had come to his shar .50100715730800) of petitioner in th also been placed on the case file it has also been pointed out that pa ar from satisfactory being involved 7, dated 15.07.2024, registered und S, at Police Station Barwala. Learne atter is still under investigation an as filed tigation. tioner is ed from t of this tion has status ndent of as been d Muni from t in the . Apart lakhs in ssion of lose the only s share. in the file to hat past lved in d under Learned ion and GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- custodial in which cam whereabout opposing th -61807-2024 -5 dial interrogation of petitioner is requ h came to his share through Bank eabouts of other accused. Prayer for di On similar lines, detailed r sing the request for grant of anticipato Firstly, that at the asking of p called up complainant twice rented house of petitioner, w present. Apart from beating c a room, more than Rs.7 la account of complainant to the Since the complainant’s mobil etc. had also been forcibly tak the petitioner, one of them complainant, called up conce procured required details for account of complainant. Rs account of petitioner. Howe phone of the complainant w aforesaid conversation was, Thereafter, one Ishwar also complainant, which call was conversation took place at 3.4 recorded. Thus, while vehe grant of pre-arrest bail, com that petitioner is actually the k 5- is required to recover the whole amou Bank transaction as also to find th r for dismissal of the petition was made iled reply was filed by complaina cipatory bail on the following grounds of petitioner, co-accused Muni De wice and asked him to come to th , where all the other accused we ing complainant and confining him .7 lakhs were transferred from th the account of Mangal Dairy Farm obile phone, cheque book, ATM Car y taken by the accused party includin them projecting himself to be oncerned Branch of HDFC Bank an for transferring the money from th Rs.1,50,000/- was credited in th owever, as luck would have it, th nt was on recording mode and th as, thus, recorded in the mobil also called up at mobile phone was attended by the petitioner. Th t 3.47 PM on 16.11.2024 was also g vehemently opposing the request fo complainant pointed out in the rep the kingpin of the entire incident. H amount find the s made. plainant rounds:- i Devi to the were him in m the Farm. Card luding be a k and m the in the , the d the obile. ne of This so got st for reply t. His GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 5. documents 6. the counse Supreme C application 7. including and again r to take int accused tam justice etc. the society which shou 8. The State Supreme C ought not t 9. petitioner i In view of counsel for as also taki -61807-2024 -6 presence is needed to unearth involved in the incident. Di prayed for. 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 Hon’ble Supreme Court in ding Gurbaksh Singh v. State of Pun gain reiterated that while considering ke into consideration the facts like sed tampering with the evidence and e etc. Court should be circumspect a ociety as well. The anticipatory ba h should be exercised in the extraordin In Nikita Jagganath Shetty @ tate of Maharashtra and another, eme Court held that “Anticipatory ba not to be granted in a routine manne Factual backdrop of the cas r in the entire incident has been h ew of submissions advanced by learn sel for complainant, which have been so taking note of the fact that though t 6- arth the details of all those, who we Dismissal of the petition has bee 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. rt in plethora of judicial preceden Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has tim dering the anticipatory bail the Court s like gravity of offence, chances o e and probabilities of his fleeing fro pect about the impact of its decision o ory bail is an extraordinary discretio aordinary circumstances. etty @ Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v her, 2025 AIR SC 3375, the Hon’b ry bail is an exceptional remedy an nner.” he case and the role played by th een highlighted in para 2 of this orde y learned State counsel as also learne been highlighted in para 4 of the orde ough the concession of interim bail wa were been sed the by both Hon’ble with an cedents has time Court is nces of ng from ision on scretion av vs. Hon’ble y and by the is order. learned e order, bail was GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- granted to amount of R the wherea with the su for the com not been ab favour entit 10. 02.02.2026 gbs -61807-2024 -7 ted to the petitioner, but neither did h nt of Rs.1,50,000/- credited in his acc hereabouts of the other accused who the submissions advanced by learned e complainant in the factual scenario een able to make out a case of except ur entitling him this extra ordinary relie The petition being devoid of a .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 7- r did he get the recovery of the enti is account, effected, nor did he disclos d who are still at large. Thus, agreein arned State counsel and learned couns nario of the case in hand, petitioner ha exceptional depravity or hardship in h ry relief of grant of pre-arrest bail. id of any merit is hereby dismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No e entire disclose greeing counsel oner has ip in his NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.06 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document