CRM-M-6171 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Nitin State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: - NAMIT KUMAR, J. 1. 482 of the Bharatiya Nag anticipatory bail in case FIR No under Section 127(6) added Sections Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Line Jind, District Jind. 2. No.2-mother of 6171 of 2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6171 Date of decision Versus Haryana and another CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Mr. B.S. Rana, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Nayandeep, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Priyanka Sadar, AAG, Haryana. Mr. R.N. Shokla, Advocate, for respondent No.2. KUMAR, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0440 dated 30.12.2024 registered under Section 127(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya added Sections 123, 65(1), 64(1) of the BNS Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Line Jind, District Jind. Present FIR was registered on the complaint of respondent mother of victim to the effect that on 30.12.2024, her daughter 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 6171 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 06.05.2025 ......Petitioner ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR with Mr. Nayandeep, Advocate, Ms. Priyanka Sadar, AAG, Haryana. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section rik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking .0440 dated 30.12.2024 registered yaya Sanhita, 2023 and later on 123, 65(1), 64(1) of the BNS and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Civil Present FIR was registered on the complaint of respondent victim to the effect that on 30.12.2024, her daughter RAVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6171 Sxxx and her brother after dropping victim at her school, brother of the his class. There was exam of the victim and when her brother cam after his exam then the victim was not found in class and he tried to search her in the school but he could not find the victim. 3. that the petitioner present case the FIR or in the video clip sent by the daughter of the complainant wherein she has stated that she was pressurised to make statement against the petitioner. FIR that daughter of the complainant is missing from school. further contended that daughter of the petitioner, theref ready to join the investigation. 4. for grant of antic are serious allegations again the petitioner is necessary, concession of anticipatory bail. 5. the record. 6171 of 2025 (O&M) her brother went to Gol School Defence Colony Jind and after dropping victim at her school, brother of the his class. There was exam of the victim and when her brother cam after his exam then the victim was not found in class and he tried to search her in the school but he could not find the victim. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely present case. He further contended that there is no serious allegation in the FIR or in the video clip sent by the daughter of the complainant wherein she has stated that she was pressurised to make statement against the petitioner. He further contended that only it is alleged in the FIR that daughter of the complainant is missing from school. contended that petitioner has not committed any wrong with the daughter of the complainant. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required and he is ready to join the investigation. Per contra, learned State counsel for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner are serious allegations against the petitioner the petitioner is necessary, therefore, he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused 2 went to Gol School Defence Colony Jind and after dropping victim at her school, brother of the complainant went to his class. There was exam of the victim and when her brother came after his exam then the victim was not found in class and he tried to search her in the school but he could not find the victim. counsel for the petitioner has contended has been falsely implicated in the further contended that there is no serious allegation in the FIR or in the video clip sent by the daughter of the complainant wherein she has stated that she was pressurised to make statement ended that only it is alleged in the FIR that daughter of the complainant is missing from school. He petitioner has not committed any wrong with the . Nothing is to be recovered from the custodial interrogation is not required and he is Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer ipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that there st the petitioner. Custodial interrogation of therefore, he does not deserve the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused RAVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6171 6. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court Cases 171, power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) extraordinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his/ 7. her statement under Section 180 BNSS respondent No.2/complainant has stated that Oyo Hotel near Rani Talab, Jind where he ga with intoxicated substance for eating and thereafter she became unconscious and thereafter he went away after leaving the daughter of the complainant in the market. Thereafte minor-victim under Section 183 BNSS was recorded before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, wherein she has fully corroborated the version of statement of her mother under Section 180 BNSS. From the perusal of status report it also transpires that as per CCTV footage of the guest house, petitioner and minor victim were entering and going inside the guest house. petitioner are serious in nature. may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. 6171 of 2025 (O&M) As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court , power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) rdinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his/ As per status report filed by the State, her statement under Section 180 BNSS respondent No.2/complainant has stated that petitioner had taken the minor victim and her friend to Oyo Hotel near Rani Talab, Jind where he ga with intoxicated substance for eating and thereafter she became unconscious. Petitioner committed wrong with the victim in Oyo Hotel and thereafter he went away after leaving the daughter of the complainant in the market. Thereafter, on 03.01.2025, statement of victim under Section 183 BNSS was recorded before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, wherein she has fully corroborated the version of statement of her mother under Section 180 From the perusal of status report it also transpires that as per CCTV footage of the guest house, petitioner and minor victim were entering and going inside the guest house. petitioner are serious in nature. Custodial interr may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. 3 As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 Supreme Court , power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (now Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is somewhat rdinary in character and it is to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his/her liberty. As per status report filed by the State, on 02.01.2025 in her statement under Section 180 BNSS respondent No.2/complainant petitioner had taken the minor victim and her friend to Oyo Hotel near Rani Talab, Jind where he gave her something mixed with intoxicated substance for eating and thereafter she became Petitioner committed wrong with the victim in Oyo Hotel and thereafter he went away after leaving the daughter of the r, on 03.01.2025, statement of victim under Section 183 BNSS was recorded before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, wherein she has fully corroborated the version of statement of her mother under Section 180 From the perusal of status report it also transpires that as per CCTV footage of the guest house, petitioner and minor victim were The allegations against the Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. RAVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6171 Curtailing of investigation to proceed without hi this stage. 8. dictum passed in another, 2021(4) RCR (Crl.) 598 Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and another, (2020)19 Supreme Court Apex Court had denied the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. 9. 10. the considered view that petitioner cannot been falsely enroped in the crime and necessary in the case and that petitioner liberty and, therefore, 11. 12. a final expression of opinion on the merits of the 13. 06.05.2025 R.S. 6171 of 2025 (O&M) Curtailing of his freedom is necessary in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and to protect witnesses at Reliance can be placed upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court dictum passed in Prem Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and another, 2021(4) RCR (Crl.) 598 and Anil Kumar Singh v. High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and another, (2020)19 Supreme Court Cases 364 Apex Court had denied the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. No other point has been argued. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that petitioner cannot been falsely enroped in the crime and his necessary in the case and that petitioner may , therefore, does not deserve concession In view of the above, the petition is dismissed. However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 4 freedom is necessary in order to enable the ndrance and to protect witnesses at placed upon the Hon’ble Supreme Court Prem Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Anil Kumar Singh v. High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General and Cases 364 whereby the Hon’ble Apex Court had denied the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity of offences and the conduct of the petitioner. No other point has been argued. No other point has been argued. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that petitioner cannot prima facie be said to have his custodial interrogation is may abscond and misuse his concession of anticipatory bail. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed. However, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document