Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 48726 (PNJ)

MAKKHAN SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

CRM-M/21871/2025 · 2025-05-20

Manjari Nehru Kaul

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 210 MAKKHAN STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, 1. of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.190 Penal Code, 1860, regist (Annexure P- 2. has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the ground of the husband of co overt act has been attributed to the petitioner, and the allegations against him are vague and generalized. Learned counsel further argues that the FIR appears to be a counterblast to the complaint lodged the petitioner against the complainant under Sections 376, 506 of the IPC, which predates IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM- Date of decision: May 20 MAKKHAN SINGH Versus HARYANA AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr. Jagpal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana Mr. Rohit Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.2. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. The instant petition is the third petition of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case dated 30.06.2024 under Sections Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station -1). Learned counsel for the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the ground of the husband of co-accused Anita Kaur. It is contended that overt act has been attributed to the petitioner, and the allegations against him are vague and generalized. Learned counsel further argues that appears to be a counterblast to the complaint lodged the petitioner against the complainant under Sections 376, 506 , which predates the present FIR. He also contends that there is no IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -M-21871-2025 Date of decision: May 20, 2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondents HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana. is the third petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case .2024 under Sections 384, 506, 34 of the Indian ered at Police Station Sector-31, District Faridabad Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the ground of being . It is contended that no specific or overt act has been attributed to the petitioner, and the allegations levelled against him are vague and generalized. Learned counsel further argues that appears to be a counterblast to the complaint lodged by the wife of the petitioner against the complainant under Sections 376, 506, 509 and 34 the present FIR. He also contends that there is no ...Petitioner s filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case of the Indian Faridabad submits that the petitioner being no specific or levelled against him are vague and generalized. Learned counsel further argues that he wife of , 509 and 34 the present FIR. He also contends that there is no Jaspreet Kaur 2025.05.26 08:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21871 financial transaction between the petitioner and the the allegations of financial impropriety Additionally, reliance is placed on an alleged compromise Annexure P intervention resolve the matter amicably. 3. and submissions filed by the submitted that despite sustained efforts by the investigating agency, the petitioner has evaded arrest and continues to remain untraceable seriousness of the matter is further reflected warrants against the petitioner by the learned trial Court, returnable on 27.08.2025. cooperate with the investigating agency, as per the learned State counsel, is a matter of grave concern. 4. has also opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. Learned counsel for the complainant has catego of any compromise between the parties. It been effected between the parties, as has been falsely submitted before this Court. 21871-2025 financial transaction between the petitioner and the the allegations of financial impropriety are misconceived and baseless. Additionally, reliance is placed on an alleged compromise Annexure P-5, purportedly executed between the parties with of the respectables of the society resolve the matter amicably. Per contra, learned State counsel and submissions made by the counsel opposite filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central, Faridabad. It is submitted that despite sustained efforts by the investigating agency, the petitioner has evaded arrest and continues to remain untraceable seriousness of the matter is further reflected warrants against the petitioner by the learned trial Court, returnable on The conduct of the petitioner in absconding and failing to cooperate with the investigating agency, as per the learned State counsel, is a matter of grave concern. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has also opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. Learned counsel for the complainant has catego compromise between the parties. It is been effected between the parties, as has been falsely submitted before this -2- financial transaction between the petitioner and the complainant, and hence, are misconceived and baseless. Additionally, reliance is placed on an alleged compromise, annexed as executed between the parties with the tables of the society, indicating their intention to earned State counsel, while opposing the prayer by the counsel opposite, has referred to the affidavit of Police, Central, Faridabad. It is submitted that despite sustained efforts by the investigating agency, the petitioner has evaded arrest and continues to remain untraceable. The seriousness of the matter is further reflected by the issuance of non-bailable warrants against the petitioner by the learned trial Court, returnable on The conduct of the petitioner in absconding and failing to cooperate with the investigating agency, as per the learned State counsel, is a Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant has also opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. Learned counsel for the complainant has categorically denied the existence is asserted that no settlement has been effected between the parties, as has been falsely submitted before this , and hence, are misconceived and baseless. , annexed as the , indicating their intention to ayer referred to the affidavit of Police, Central, Faridabad. It is submitted that despite sustained efforts by the investigating agency, the . The able warrants against the petitioner by the learned trial Court, returnable on The conduct of the petitioner in absconding and failing to cooperate with the investigating agency, as per the learned State counsel, is a /complainant has also opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite. rically denied the existence asserted that no settlement has been effected between the parties, as has been falsely submitted before this Jaspreet Kaur 2025.05.26 08:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-21871 5. relevant material placed on record. 6. by the petitioner seeking the concession of anticipatory bail. When a specific query was put to the learned counsel about the change in circumstances following the dismissal of the earlier petitioner primarily relied upon the purported compromise very existence of such compromise is seriously the complainant, 7. contained in the FIR (Annexure P petitioner despite issuance significant change in circumstanc petitions, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 8. 9. shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. May 20, 2025 Jaspreet Kaur 21871-2025 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record. It is not disputed that the present petition is the third one filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of anticipatory bail. When a specific query was put to the learned counsel about the change in circumstances following the dismissal of the earlier petitions, learned counsel for the petitioner primarily relied upon the purported compromise very existence of such compromise is seriously the complainant, and its authenticity and voluntariness remains in doubt At this stage, considering the se contained in the FIR (Annexure P-1), the continued evasion of arrest by the petitioner despite issuance of non-bailable warrants, and the absence of any significant change in circumstances since the dismissal of the previous bail petitions, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the May 20, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -3- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the It is not disputed that the present petition is the third one filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of anticipatory bail. When a specific query was put to the learned counsel about the change in circumstances petitions, learned counsel for the petitioner primarily relied upon the purported compromise. However, the very existence of such compromise is seriously disputed by the counsel for and its authenticity and voluntariness remains in doubt. At this stage, considering the serious nature of the allegations continued evasion of arrest by the bailable warrants, and the absence of any es since the dismissal of the previous bail petitions, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the It is not disputed that the present petition is the third one filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of anticipatory bail. When a specific query was put to the learned counsel about the change in circumstances petitions, learned counsel for the However, the counsel for rious nature of the allegations continued evasion of arrest by the bailable warrants, and the absence of any es since the dismissal of the previous bail petitions, this Court does not deem it fit to extend the extraordinary anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the Jaspreet Kaur 2025.05.26 08:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh