Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17054 (PNJ)

SAKINA BIBI ALIAS POOJA v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/4351/2025 · 2025-05-12

Manjari Nehru Kaul

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 CRM-M-4351-2025 Date of decision: May 12, 2025 SAKINA BIBI @ POOJA ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Mr. Anoop Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. A.G., Haryana with SI Narpal. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.28 dated 25.01.2024 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the IPC registered at Police Station Shivaji Nagar, Gurugram, District Gurugram. 2. On 27.01.2025, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation and the relevant part of the said order reads as under: - “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was in custody in another case under the NDPS Act in which she was granted bail subsequently. Consequently, it was not possible for her to know that her mother had presented a fake person as surety in the aforesaid case. It has also been submitted that the petitioner's mother, who allegedly presented a fake person as a surety, has already been extended the concession of regular bail.” Jaspreet Kaur 2025.05.13 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-4351-2025 -2- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 27.01.2025, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 4. Status report by way of an affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, City, Gurugram on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed in the Registry of this Court, which is taken on record. 5. Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation. 6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 27.01.2025, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS. May 12, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Jaspreet Kaur JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Jaspreet Kaur 2025.05.13 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh