CRM-M-31211-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Sr. No.215 Case No. : CRM-M-31211-2025 Decided On : August 11, 2025 Mo. Mehtab .... Petitioner vs. State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR. * * * Present : Mr. Mohd. Zeeshan Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sulender Kumar, DAG, Haryana. * * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. : Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.65 dated 21.03.2025, under Sections 3(5), 305 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at Police Station Sector-14, District Gurugram. Brief facts of the case are that the aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of complaint made by one Madan Lal, submitting therein that he was having two e-rickshaws, one having five batteries and the other with four batteries. On 14.03.2025, his shop was closed on account of festival of Holi and e-rickshaws were parked outside his shop. When driver of said e-rickshaws namely Subahsh came to take the said e-rickshaws, he found that the batteries of said e-rickshaws were missing. The CCTV cameras installed in the premises were checked, which showed that at about MONIKA 2025.08.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31211-2025 2 09:15 AM, one while Wagon-R Car came in front of the shop, from which three persons alighted and were seen taking away the aforesaid batteries. The complainant further stated that initially he made efforts to trace the culprits at his own level and later, the FIR in question was registered and prayer was made to take action against the culprits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and has been nominated in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused. There was unexplained delay in registration of the FIR. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation. Nothing is to be recovered from him. The co-accused Nasruddin, on whose disclosure statement name of the petitioner has cropped up in this case, has already been granted regular bail by the Court of learned JMFC, Gurugram, vide order dated 22.04.2025. Out of nine stolen batteries of e-rickshaw, two have been recovered from co-accused Nasruddin. He further urged that the petitioner is not required for any interrogation and no recovery is to be effected from him. It has, therefore, been prayed that the petitioner be granted concession of anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the present bail petition and has contended that apart from the present FIR, another FIR under Sections 379, 34 IPC is also pending against the petitioner. As per the allegations levelled in the present case, the petitioner along with co-accused Nasruddin and Israil committed theft of nine batteries of e-rickshaws of complainant. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for fair and proper investigation. Heard. MONIKA 2025.08.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31211-2025 3 Name of the petitioner surfaced in disclosure statement of co- accused Nasruddin. As per the allegations, the petitioner along with co- accused Nasruddin and Israil committed theft of nine batteries of e- rickshaws of complainant. Co-accused Nasruddin, on whose disclosure statement, the petitioner has been nominated in the present case, has already been granted regular bail by the Court of learned JMFC, Gurugram, vide order dated 22.04.2025. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for any purpose and no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on furnishing bail/surety bonds, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions, as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS. It will be open for the Investigating Officer to call the petitioner to join investigation, if so required, by issuing a written notice in this regard. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions mentioned in Section 482(2) of the BNSS. However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition. August 11, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No. Whether reportable ? Yes/No. MONIKA 2025.08.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31211-2025 4 MONIKA 2025.08.13 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document