IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 206-3 RAJUDDIN @ RAJUDEEN STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present : Mr. Ms. Sheenu Sura, D.A.G., Haryana. MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral) 1. Prayer in this petition, filed is for grant of petitioners in case FIR No.46 dated 18.02.2024 registered under 279, 332, 336,353, 186, 307, 506, 120 Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gaus at Police Station Sadar Nuh, District Nuh. 2. Vide order dated granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on 13.07.2024 but he did not cooperate with the Investigating Officer and did not get recovered the weapons of offence and therefore, it is urged that his custodial interrogation is required 4. This Court cannot treat the behavior attributed to the petitioner to be instance of non accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incrim statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, non recovery is concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: RAJUDDIN @ RAJUDEEN Versus STATE OF HARYANA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Arjun Attri, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sheenu Sura, D.A.G., Haryana. **** MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral) Prayer in this petition, filed is for grant of petitioners in case FIR No.46 dated 18.02.2024 registered under 279, 332, 336,353, 186, 307, 506, 120-B, 395 and 397 of IPC and Sections 5 and 13(3) of Hary Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 and Section 3(2) of PDP at Police Station Sadar Nuh, District Nuh. Vide order dated 24.06.2024, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating ficer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on 13.07.2024 but he did not cooperate with the Investigating Officer and did not get recovered the weapons of offence and therefore, it is urged that his custodial interrogation is required for thorough investigation. This Court cannot treat the behavior attributed to the petitioner to be instance of non-cooperation, justifying denial for pre accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incrim statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, non recovery is concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA No.30398 of 2024 Date of decision: 20.05.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondent HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA , Advocate for the petitioner. Prayer in this petition, filed is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.46 dated 18.02.2024 registered under 279, 332, 336,353, B, 395 and 397 of IPC and Sections 5 and 13(3) of Haryana amvardhan Act, 2015 and Section 3(2) of PDPP Act, .2024, passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating ficer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on 13.07.2024 but he did not cooperate with the Investigating Officer and did not get recovered the weapons of offence and therefore, it is urged that his for thorough investigation. This Court cannot treat the behavior attributed to the petitioner to cooperation, justifying denial for pre-arrest bail since, an accused, while joining investigation, is not expected to make self incriminating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, non recovery is concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.46 dated 18.02.2024 registered under 279, 332, 336,353, ana P Act, .2024, passed by this Court, the petitioner was Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating ficer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on 13.07.2024 but he did not cooperate with the Investigating Officer and did not get recovered the weapons of offence and therefore, it is urged that his This Court cannot treat the behavior attributed to the petitioner to arrest bail since, an inating statement under the threat that the State may seek withdrawal of the interim protection granted to him. So far as, non recovery is concerned, that cannot be considered as ground for denial of bail to the petitioner. In the considered Jyoti 2025.05.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM opinion of thi required. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 24.06.2024, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, compliance of usual terms and conditi bail. 20.05.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.30398of 2024 opinion of this Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 24.06.2024, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, compliance of usual terms and conditions requisite for grant of anticipatory Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No -2- s Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 24.06.2024, granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to ons requisite for grant of anticipatory (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No s Court, the pre trial incarceration of the petitioner is not required. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order dated subject to ons requisite for grant of anticipatory Jyoti 2025.05.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document