CRM-M-18049-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 201 CRM-M-18049-2025 Decided on:- 18.08.2025 Chander Shekhar ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate and Mr. Keerat Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana. * * * * * AMARJOT BHATTI, J.(Oral) 1. Petitioner Chander Shekhar has filed petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 490 dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure P/1) under Section 351(2) and 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Chandimandir, Panchkula. 2. As per the facts of case, present FIR has been registered on the statement of prosecutrix ‘A’ where she stated that she was on talking terms with Chander Shekhar for the last about one year. He allured her by saying that he will perform marriage with her and took her to Morni Hotel where he developed physical relations with her against her consent. He again told her to visit Morni Hotel, to which she refused. He threatened to kill her. He took her to Rose Hotel and developed physical relations with her against her wishes. Lastly, he developed physical relations with her on 22.07.2024. Subsequently, when she asked him to marry her, he refused and stopped LALIT SHARMA 2025.08.20 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18049-2025 -2- talking to her. Zero FIR dated 15.10.2024 was registered at Police Station Women, Naraingarh, District Ambala and matter was referred to Police Station Chandi Mandir, District Panchkula for further investigation. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner argued that complainant had made multiple complaints against petitioner and changed her stand time and again. Initially she filed a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Ambala City dated 11.09.2024 (Annexure P-3). She gave her statement on 16.09.2024 that she did not want any action on the said complaint. Copy of said statement is Annexure P-4. During inquiry, she gave another statement that she may be granted some time to think about the incident and till then no action may be taken. Copy of said statement is Annexure P-5. There is a statement dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure P-6) where she categorically stated that no physical relations ever took place between petitioner and herself. Inquiry Report is Annexure P-7. Thereafter, she filed another complaint dated 15.10.2024 with same allegations. Prosecutrix again wrote to DSP, Panchkula that she did not wish for continuation of said FIR as she was under mental stress and suffering from depression. True copy of letter dated 04.12.2024 is Annexure P-8. Affidavit furnished by prosecutrix/complainant is Annexure P-9. Affidavit of father of prosecutrix is Annexure P-10 and notice to disown prosecutrix is Annexure P-11. It is argued that in pursuance of order dated 02.04.2025, petitioner has already joined investigation and he is still ready to do so. Therefore, his anticipatory bail petition may be allowed. 4. Notice was served upon respondent No. 2 who did not appear despite service. Status report has been filed. It is pointed out that statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded before the LALIT SHARMA 2025.08.20 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18049-2025 -3- Magistrate on 12.11.2024 (Annexure R-1) levelling serious allegations against petitioner. As per MLR, she refused for her internal examination. Learned counsel representing State further confirmed letter dated 04.12.2024 (Annexure P-8) addressed to DCP, Panchkula stating that she did not wish to pursue present FIR. It is confirmed that in pursuance of order dated 02.04.2025, petitioner has already joined investigation. 5. I have considered the aforesaid factual position. In pursuance of interim relief, petitioner has already joined investigation and fully cooperated with Investigating Agency. Respondent No. 2 has not come forward to oppose present anticipatory bail filed by petitioner. In the light of aforesaid factual position, no purpose would be served by sending petitioner behind the bars, specially when he is ready to cooperate with Investigating Agency. Therefore, anticipatory bail petition filed by petitioner Chander Shekhar is allowed. He be not arrested. In case of his arrest, he be released on bail to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer concerned, subject to condition that petitioner will join investigation as and when required. He will not tamper with or interfere with investigation and will not leave country without prior permission as provided under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. 18.08.2025 (AMARJOT BHATTI) lalit JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No LALIT SHARMA 2025.08.20 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document