CRM-M-64881-2024 (O&M) -1- 207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CRM-M-64881-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.04.2025 **** Naresh ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present: Mr. Ankur Dua, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Aywan Singh, AAG, Haryana. Ms. Saroj, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. **** JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL) 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the investigation of the case, the offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 354 & 354-A IPC stand deleted and Section 498-A IPC has been added and on his oral request, the necessary corrections may be carried out in the head note as well as in the prayer clause of the petition. 2. The oral request made by learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted. 3. It is, therefore, directed that in the head note as well as in the prayer clause of the petition, the aforesaid provisions of ‘Sections 313, 328, 354, 354-A, 376(2)(n), 509 IPC’ be substituted and read as ‘Sections 313, 328, 509 & 498-A IPC’. 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 Bhumika Bhati 2025.05.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CRM-M-64881-2024 (O&M) -2- for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.301, dated 11.12.2024 under Sections 313, 328, 354, 354-A, 376(2)(n), 509 IPC (later on offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 354 & 354-A IPC deleted and Section 498-A IPC has been added), registered at Police Station Arya Nagar, Rohtak. 3. He further submitted that when notice of motion was issued by this Court on 20.12.2024, then it was directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner and the petitioner has not only joined the investigation but has also fully cooperated with the investigation process. Therefore, the aforesaid interim order may be made absolute. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Ayuwan Singh, learned AAG, Haryana, has stated on instructions that the offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 354 & 354-A IPC have been deleted during the investigation of the case and Section 498-A IPC has been added. He further submitted that after the interim protection was granted by this Court whereby it was so directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner, the petitioner has joined investigation and has cooperated with the investigation process and he is not required for custodial interrogation. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the fact that the allegations against him are serious in nature. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the stand taken by the learned State Counsel that the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation because he has already joined the investigation and has also fully co-operated with the investigation process and also considering the fact that Sections 376(2)(n), 354 & 354-A IPC stand deleted, this Court is of the view that the petitioner deserves the concession of anticipatory bail. 6. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. It is directed that in Bhumika Bhati 2025.05.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CRM-M-64881-2024 (O&M) -3- case in future the petitioner is required to join investigation, then he shall join the same and shall also co-operate fully with the investigation process. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing of personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer and he shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) BNSS. 30.04.2025 (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) Bhumika JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No 2. Whether reportable: Yes/No Bhumika Bhati 2025.05.05 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh