CRM-M-5605-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 212/2 CRM-M-5605-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.04.2025 Amarnath .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Pawan Attri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Sheoran, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Manmohan Saroop, Advocate and Ms. Meenakshi Saroop, Advocate for the complainant. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU , J. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 03 dated 05.01.2025 (P-1), under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Sadar Pehowa, District Kurukshetra. 2. Allegations are that petitioner in connivance with co-accused cheated complainant to the tune of Rs.4,50,000/-, on pretext of sending him abroad, but failed to do so. 3. Contends that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 06.02.2025 and in pursuance thereof, he has already joined investigation; hence, his custodial interrogation is not required. Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5605-2025 2 4. The above factual position is not disputed by learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI Singara Ram and submits that his custodial interrogation is not required “at this stage”. 5. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer while submitting that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature; hence, he does not deserve the concession of pre-arrest bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper- book. 7. It transpires that petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court, vide order dated 06.02.2025 and the order reads as under:- “Contends, inter alia, that co-accused Balwinder Kumar has already been granted interim protection by this Court in CRM-M-3106- 2025. Learned State Counsel seeks more time to have instructions and/or to file written response in the matter. To be heard along with CRM-M-3106-2025 on 04.03.2025. In the meanwhile, petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Officer, but he be not arrested till the next date of hearing.” 8. It is duly acknowledged by learned State Counsel that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 9. Although learned counsel for complainant has opposed the prayer; but contention to that effect is liable to be rejected for the reason that very basis for such a transaction is having no sanctity in the eyes of law. Apart that State is not asking for custodial interrogation of the petitioner. 10. In view of the above, there is no justification to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is allowed; interim order dated 06.02.2025 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS. Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5605-2025 3 11. It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation. 12. The above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the bail matter. 13. It is also clarified that in case of any recurrence on the part of petitioner, State would be at liberty to move an appropriate application for recalling of this order. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 02.04.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rajeev Purohit 2025.04.04 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document