221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA RAHUL GODARA ALIAS MONU STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Karan Pathak, for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate and Mr. Gandharv Malhotra, Advocate for HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 05.03.2025 under Sections 108, Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Odhan, Dabwali, District Sirsa. 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RAHUL GODARA ALIAS MONU V/S HARYANA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Karan Pathak, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate and Mr. Gandharv Malhotra, Advocate for the complainant. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 05.03.2025 under Sections 108, Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Odhan, Dabwali, District Sirsa. On 25.04.2025, following order was passed: “Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 05.03.2025 under Sections 108, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Odhan, Dabwali, District Sirsa. Learned senior counsel fo contends that the petitioner is Sarpanch of the village and he made a call to deceased with regard to his conduct, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21735-2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate and Mr. Gandharv Malhotra, Advocate Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 05.03.2025 under Sections 108, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Odhan, , following order was passed: Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.37 dated 05.03.2025 under Sections 108, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’), registered at Police Station Odhan, Dabwali, District Sirsa. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is Sarpanch of the village and he made a call to deceased with regard to his conduct, MANISHA 2025.05.26 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-21735 21735-2025 2 which was brought to his knowledge, as the deceased was harassing one lady in the village. Further, during the course of investigation, she was joined in the investigation and made a categoric statement that the deceased was harassing her. The call details were also taken into possession by the police. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner relies upon transcrip place between the petitioner and the deceased, as reproduced in para No.5 of the petition and submits that not even a word has been uttered by the petitioner, which would make out a case of abetment against him. Notice of motion. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent State and Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Nikhil Sehrawat, Advocate and Mr. Deepak Goyat, Advocate, appears on behalf of the complai Vakalatnama in the Court today, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place of the case file. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to t petitioner on the ground that after the deceased consumed the poisonous substance, while he was admitted in the hospital, his statement was recorded by the jurisdictional police authorities. Thereafter, he died and as such, his statement is treated to b petitioner is an influential person and local police was not conducting the investigation in a free and fair manner, therefore, the investigation has now been entrusted to Crime Branch. Furthermore, the proximity between t suicide and abetment by the petitioner clearly makes out a case under Section 108 of BNS against him. Adjourned to 23.05.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC which was brought to his knowledge, as the deceased was harassing one lady in the village. Further, during the course of investigation, she was joined in the investigation and made a categoric statement that the deceased was harassing her. The call details were also taken into possession by the police. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner relies upon transcript of the conversaion took place between the petitioner and the deceased, as reproduced in para No.5 of the petition and submits that not even a word has been uttered by the petitioner, which would make out a case of abetment against him. . Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent- State and Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate, assisted by Mr. Nikhil Sehrawat, Advocate and Mr. Deepak Goyat, Advocate, appears on behalf of the complainant and files Vakalatnama in the Court today, which is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that after the deceased consumed the poisonous substance, while he was admitted in the hospital, his statement was recorded by the jurisdictional police authorities. Thereafter, he died and as such, his statement is treated to be dying declaration. Further, the petitioner is an influential person and local police was not conducting the investigation in a free and fair manner, therefore, the investigation has now been entrusted to Crime Branch. Furthermore, the proximity between the suicide and abetment by the petitioner clearly makes out a case under Section 108 of BNS against him. Adjourned to 23.05.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC MANISHA 2025.05.26 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-21735 3. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated petitioner has joined the investigation interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned the order dated 25.04.2025 terms and conditions enumerated in Section Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 21735-2025 3 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anti bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the ord Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.” Learned State counsel, on instructions f submits that in compliance of order dated 25.04.2025 petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned 25.04.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions enumerated in Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) The petition is accordingly disposed of. 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) ction 438(2) of the Code of Criminal If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in on instructions from Inspector Raj Kumar, 25.04.2025 passed by this Court, the and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, , is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the 482(2) BNSS, 2023 (Erstwhile The petition is accordingly disposed of. MANISHA 2025.05.26 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-21735 6. Nothing observed expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. May 23, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 21735-2025 4 Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.05.26 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment