CRM-M- IN 111 Vishal Vers State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. registered 191(3), 61 the present CRM-M-73 dismissed a 2. noticed her intimating who had su police team ‘ruqa’ and -13898-2026 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA Versus of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Ravi Kumar Girdhwal, Ad Ms. Shweta Nahata, DAG, Ha **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in case tered against him under Sections 10 3), 61 of BNS, at Police Station Khar resent 2nd petition for grant of anticip 73507-2025 seeking similar re issed as withdrawn from this Court, vi Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- On 11.11.2025, a ‘ruqa’ was ting the police officials that one Ajay suffered injuries in an assault is a team headed by ASI Manish reac and MLR and also came to know th 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-13898-2026 Date of Decision: 13.03.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. al, Advocate for the petitioner. G, Haryana. n case FIR No. 702 dated 11.11.202 103, 110, 115, 117(2), 126, 19 Kharkhoda, District Sonipat, has file anticipatory bail. First petition bearin ilar relief of anticipatory bail wa vide order dated 16.1.2026. ging from the documents on record b was received from CHC Kharkhod Ajay, son of Bhopal, resident of Pip is admitted. Immediately thereafte reached CHC, Kharkhoda, collecte w that on account of delicate medic .2026 .2025, 6, 190, as filed bearing ail was cord be khoda f Pipli eafter, llected edical GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- condition, members w been admi seeking per an agricult months ag regarding a of respecta nursing a g (c) was ret Governmen his way b accompani respective Lalit, he (c were know An onlooke arrived, th rushed to C bruises, ap Super Spec vide FIR N 126(2), 11 Sonipat. -13898-2026 -2 ion, injured, he had been referred t rs were contacted, the police officia dmitted in Kainos Hospital, Rohta g permission from Doctor on duty, s iculturist by profession, was record ago, he had had physical alterca ing a plot. Police authorities were ectables, a compromise was arrive a grudge against him (c). At abo s returning home from GYM at Kha nment school of the village in his car y by parking his vehicle in the panied by 8-10 other youths, who ha tive vehicles. Without any exchang (c) was mercilessly assaulted. N nown to the complainant, were poi ooker called up police helpline at the assailants sped away. Arran to CHC, Kharkhoda. Medico legal report indicated s, apart from multiple fractures and Specialist Centre. On the basis of c IR No. 702 dated 11.11.2025, was , 117(2), 110, 61(2) of BNS, at Po 2- red to PGI, Rohtak. When the fami fficials were apprised that injured ha ohtak. On the following day, aft uty, statement of Ajay, son of Bhopa corded, who pointed therein that fe tercation with Lalit, son of Dalshe ere intimated but due to interventio rrived at. It appears that Lalit wa about 8 PM on 10.11.2025, when h Kharkhoda and had reached near th s car No. HR-79D-8530, Lalit blocke the middle of the road. Lalit wa had also arrived at the site in the ange of hot words, at the instance d. Names of some of the people wh pointed by him (c) in the complain at 112. When the police authoriti rrangements were made and he wa cated that injured had suffered man and had been advised to be taken to of complaint and MLR, a formal ca as registered u/s 190, 191(3), 115(2 t Police Station Kharkhoda, Distri family ed has , after hopal, at few lsher, ention it was en he ar the locked it was n their nce of e who plaint. orities was many n to a l case 15(2), istrict GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- authorities unfortunate officials rea conducting Doctors in Deepak, bo Dharambir, assailants, and Vicky their disclo involvemen used in the Deepak, wh relevant tim was part of eliminate present pet movements same. As n country ma petitioner. grant of p -13898-2026 -3 Investigations were set into rities visited the site. On the same da rtunate death of Ajay. Hence, Sectio ials reached Medanta Hospital, Gurugr ucting Post Mortem Examination. ors in the hospital. During the cour ak, both sons of Dalsher, Ajay, so ambir, residents of Pipli, PS Kharkhod It is further the case of pro lants, who had participated in the inc Vicky alias Disu were arrested on 19 disclosure statements were recorded, lvement in the commission of offence in the commission of offence. As per the case set up by the ak, who was present at the site and w ant time, had handed over the same to part of the conspiracy and had attend nate and take revenge from Ajay was nt petitioner was to conduct ‘recce’ ments of deceased and to further inf . As noted above, one of the accused try made pistol .32 bore, which was la ioner. Apprehending his arrest, peti t of pre-arrest bail. The same cam 3- t into motion, during which polic ame day, they were intimated about th Section 103 of BNS was added. Polic Gurugram and moved an application fo tion. The needful was done by th e course of further investigation, Lali jay, son of Karamvir, Ashish son o arkhoda, District Sonipat were arrested of prosecution that two of the oth he incident, namely, Sunil alias Male on 19.11.2025. During interrogatio orded, wherein they confessed to the ffence and got recovered the weapon by the prosecution, one of the accuse and was in possession of pistol at th ame to Vishal (present petitioner), wh attended initial meetings where plan ay was discussed. The role assigned in the village, to keep track of th her inform the other accused about th ccused Deepak was in possession of th later handed over by him to prese t, petitioner moved an application fo e came to be dismissed by learne police bout the . Police tion for by the Lalit, son of rrested. e other Malesi ogation, to their eapons accused l at the , who plan to igned to k of the bout the n of the present tion for learned GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Additional of which, bail. The 16.1.2026, 3. young man attributed, disclosure s counsel tha acquired th figure as o same villag petition see of the said alleged occ “changed filing of the -13898-2026 -4 tional Sessions Judge, Sonipat, vide or hich, petitioner filed CRM-M-73507 The said petition was disposed of 2026, in the following terms:- “Status report has been filed taken on record. Copy thereo the petitioner. Learned counsel for the time, seeks permission to withd Permitted to do so. Dismissed as withdrawn Since the main case pending application if a Learned counsel for the peti g man of 26 years of age, to whom uted, has been falsely arrayed as a osure statement of other accused. It is sel that even in the last video-recor ired the status of ‘Dying Declaration e as one of the assailants, despite th village as that of the deceased. It is also the submission of le ion seeking similar relief was filed, th e said ‘Dying Declaration’, neither ed occurrence were in his possession. ged circumstance”, which as per l of the present second petition. 4- vide order dated 20.12.2025. Aggrieve 3507-2025 seeking relief of pre-arre ed of by this Court vide order date iled by respondent-State. The same ereof supplied to learned counsel fo r the petitioner after arguing for som withdraw the present petition. rawn. ase has already been disposed o if any is rendered infructuous.” e petitioner submits that petitioner, whom no specific role/overt act w as an accused only on the basis o . It is further the submission of learne ecording of the deceased, which ha ration, name of the petitioner does n pite the fact that he (P) hails from th n of learned counsel that when the fir led, the petitioner was not in knowho either the photographs relating to th ssion. These, according to him, are th per learned counsel, necessitated th grieved arrest r dated ame is sel for some ed of, ioner, a was basis of learned ich has oes not rom the the first owhow to the re the ated the GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- petitioner i willing to j allowing th reliance on 4. bail, learne deceased, inform the present pet other accus a conseque the disclosu role, which in CRM-M unaware th did not nam name of pe accused De -13898-2026 -5 It has, thus, been prayed that ioner is not needed, but being a law ng to join the investigation as and whe ing the petition has been made. In support of his submissio nce on the following judgments:- 1. Bhisham Singh v. Sta (Crl.) 65; 2. Amitej Singh @ Navte NCPHHC 65257; and 3. Krishan Kumar v. Sta 2025 decided on 12.11.2 Per contra, while opposing th learned State counsel contends that ased, was assigned the job of conduct m the other accused about his mov nt petitioner disclosed about the exac accused, that they intercepted him (c) sequence of which he later died. The isclosure statement of one of the accus which fact was also mentioned in the M-73507-2025. Learned State counsel further are that petitioner was keeping a wa ot name him in the ‘Dying Declarat of petitioner having been cropped up sed Deepak, was mentioned in the sta 5- d that though custodial interrogation o a law abiding citizen, he is ready an d when called for by the IO. Prayer fo missions, learned counsel has place . State of Haryana, 2024 (3) RC avtej Singh v. State of Punjab 202 and . State of Haryana, CRM-M-62132 .11.2025. sing the request for grant of pre-arre s that petitioner, who is co-villager onducting his (deceased) ‘recce’ and s movements. It was only when e exact location of the deceased to th im (c) and unleashed a brutal attack . The name of petitioner cropped up accused, who elaborated upon his (P’ in the status report dated 8.1.2026 file further contends that the deceased wa a watch on his movements and, thu eclaration’. That apart, the factum o ed up in the disclosure statement of co the status report dated 8.1.2026 filed ation of ady and ayer for placed RCR 2024 2132- arrest lager of and to hen the to the ttack, as ed up in his (P’s) 26 filed sed was d, thus, ctum of t of co- filed in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- CRM-M-73 circumstanc 5. documents 6. whether in second peti petitioner 7. be filed onl the dismiss U.P. 1978 as under:- 2080, this C -13898-2026 -6 73507-2025. Petitioner having fa mstance, dismissal of the petition has b Heard learned counsel for th ments on record. Questions that need adjudi her in the light of facts and circumst nd petition for grant of anticipatory ba ioner deserves the relief sought for. It is settled that second petition led only if there has been substantial c ismissal of the first one. In Babu Si 978 AIR (Supreme Court) 527, the - “…………………But an order does not necessarily preciud giving more materials, furth considerations. While we s circumstance, we cannot acce barred from second considera direction is not a conclus reconsideration is not over tu view, we entertain the applica and con.” In Manjinder Kaur vs. State , this Court has held as follows:- 6- ing failed to show substantial change n has been prayed for. for the parties and have perused th adjudication, at this stage, are as cumstances of case brought on recor ory bail is maintainable. If yes, wheth etition for grant of anticipatory bail ca ntial change in the circumstances sinc u Singh and others vs. The State o the Hon’ble Supreme Court has he rder refusing an application for ba ciude another, on a later occasio further, developments and differe e surely must set store by th accede to the faint plea that we ar ideration' at a later stage. An interi clusive adjudication, and update er turning an earlier negation. In th plication and evaluate the merits pr tate of Punjab, 2023(3) Law Hera hange in sed the e as to record, whether bail can es since tate of has held r bail asion, fferent y this e are, nterim dated In this its pro erald GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -13898-2026 -7 “2. The question, therefore, and answered is "whether application under Section 438 first one filed by the petitioner xxxx xxxx 12. We have already held th anticipatory bail application w such an application has been by passing a speaking order application, it can be said th under Section 438 Cr.P.C. subsequent bail application w on the ground that some ne change in circumstances developments such as arrest o bail granted to co-accused, di details, new documents or illn not be maintainable on a plea earlier occasion failed to co material on record or that accused was not taken, agitate However, the second/subseque 438 Cr.P.C. would be mainta material and substantive ch circumstances of the case due In G.R. Ananda Babu vs. Th 7- re, which requires to be considere ether a second anticipatory ba 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable when th oner has been withdrawn?" xxxx ld that second/subsequent/successiv ion would not be maintainable whe een dismissed by the Court on meri der. Further qua the anticipatory ba id that once a first bail applicatio .C. stand withdrawn, a second o on would not be maintainable mere e new inconsequential and cosmet es has/have come about, furth est of co-accused or main accused o , different considerations, some mo r illness of the accused. It would als plea or ground that the Court on th o consider any particular aspect o hat any point then available to th itated or pressed before the Court. equent bail application under Sectio intainable only if there is substanti e change in the fact situation an due to subsequent events or in law." s. The State of Tamil Nadu & anr idered bail en the essive where merits ry bail cation nd or erely smetic urther sed or more d also on the ect or to the ection tantial n and aw." anr., GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 2021(1) RC 65, a coord of Hon’ble follows:- -13898-2026 -8 ) RCR Criminal) 843, the Hon’ble S “……………..The specious rea cannot be invoked for success once it is rejected by a speakin Judge." In Bhisham Singh v. State o coordinate Bench of this Court while on’ble Supreme Court and of this Cou “11. As an epilogue to the principles emerge: I. Second/successive ant under 438 of Cr.P.C., hence such petition oug ground of maintainabili II. Such second/successive whether earlier p withdrawn/dismissed as prosecution or earlier p III. For the second/successi succeed, the pet essentially/pertinently change in circumstan superficial or ostensible IV. No exhaustive guideline what would consti 8- n’ble Supreme Court has held as under s reasons of change in circumstanc cessive anticipatory bail application eaking order and that too by the sam te of Haryana, 2024 (3) RCR (Crl while discussing the various judgmen is Court, on the subject in issue, held a the above rumination, the followin anticipatory bail petition(s) file .C., 1973 is maintainable in law ought not to be rejected solely on th ability thereof. ssive anticipatory bail petition(s) petition was dismissed a d as not pressed/dismissed for no ier petition was dismissed on merits. cessive anticipatory bail petition(s) petitioner/applicant shall b tly required to show substanti stances and showing of a me sible change would not suffice. elines can possible be laid down as nstitute substantial change under: tances ations, same (Crl.) dgments held as owing filed law & on the (s) is as r non- rits. n(s) to be tantial mere as to e in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. to the facts para 2 of t status repo pointed ou accused De and was as who was s -13898-2026 -9 circumstances as every circumstance. Accordin judicial wisdom and dis such second/successive V. In case a Court choo anticipatory bail petitio are pertinently required plea despite such a anticipatory petition (s) Court having successful second/successive petit clearly decipherable fro VI. Once a plea for anticip withdrawn/dismissed as prosecution or dismisse second/successive antic entertained by a Session Keeping the above settled prin e facts of the case in hand:- Facts leading to lodging of F 2 of this order. The role played by s report dated 8.1.2026 filed in CRM ted out that his name cropped up in sed Deepak. Petitioner hails from the was assigned the role of keeping a w as since not aware of this fact, did 9- very case has its own unique fact rdingly, this issue is best left to th d discretion of the Court dealing wi sive anticipatory bail petition (s). chooses to grant second/successiv etition (s), cogent and lucid reason ired to be recorded for granting suc a plea being second/successiv n (s). In other words, the cause for ssfully countenanced/entertained suc petition(s) ought to be readily an e from the said order passed. ticipatory bail has been dismissed a d as not pressed/dismissed for no issed on merits by the High Court, n anticipatory bail petition (s) shall ssions Court.” ed principles in mind, let us revert bac g of FIR have already been noticed ed by petitioner was highlighted in th CRM-M-73507-2025, wherein it wa up in the disclosure statement of co m the same village as that of decease g a watch on movements of decease ct, did not mention the same either facts/ to the g with essive asons g such essive for a d such y and sed as r non- urt, no all be ert back ticed in d in the t was t of co- eceased eceased, ither in GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- complaint o that of the not expecte can be said submitted b offence, the exceptional ordinary re the initial s intricacies o distinguisha to the petiti 9. 13.03.2026 gbs -13898-2026 -10 laint or in his video recording. Photo of the site of the incident. In view of xpected to be at the site. Thus, neithe be said to substantial change in circ itted by learned State counsel, in vi ce, the role played by the petitioner, h ptional depravity or hardship in his ary relief of grant of pre-arrest bail. nitial stage, interrogation of petitione acies of the case. Judgments referred to by lear guishable from the facts of the presen e petitioner. The petition being devoid of a .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 10- Photograph (Annexure P-5) is probab iew of role played by petitioner, he wa neither video recording nor photograp in circumstance. As has been right in view of seriousness and gravity o oner, he has failed to make out a case o in his favour entitling him this ext bail. Moreover, investigation being titioner is needed to find out the oth y learned counsel for petitioner bein present case would not be of much he id of any merit is hereby dismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No robably , he was tograph rightly avity of case of is extra being at he other being ch help NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.03.23 11:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document