CRM-M-33603-2026 -1- 102 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33603-2026 Date of decision: 03.07.2026 GAGANDEEP SINGH ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE M RS . JUSTICE R AMESH KUMARI Present: Mr. Shivam Kamboj Sirsa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the complainant. **** R AMESH KUMARI , J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438 Cr.P.C.) seeking pre-arrest bail in criminal case arising out of First Information Report, detailed as under:- FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 58 28.03.2026 Cheeka, District Haryana. 69 of BNS, 2023 2. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the criminal case was registered on the basis of complaint moved by the prosecturix to SHO at Police Station Cheeka, District Haryana, alleging that the petitioner/accused maintained physical relation with her for about 5-6 years with a promise to marry her and, thereafter, with intention to blackmail her, he allegedly clicked her obscene photographs and made videos. It is further stated in the complaint that petitioner/accused obtained a loan of Rs. 9,00,000/- for purchase of combine from one Satpal Bhuna, Anaj Mandi, Cheeka in the year 2022 and gave her two cheques to the said Satpal, which are still in the possession of Satpal. Furthermore, the petitioner/accused took her gold ornaments. The prosecutrix is married to one Harjit Singh and her husband and petitioner/accused are stated to be friends. There are further allegation that prosecutrix became 05 months' pregnant from the loins of the accused/petitioner and the petitioner/accused pressurized her to abort the child. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecturix was married woman and their relationship was long and consensual. He further ANJAL GUPTA 2026.07.08 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33603-2026 -2- submits that the first bail petition filed by the petitioner/accused had since been withdrawn. 5. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the second bail petition filed by the petitioner/accused is not maintainable. 6. Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first bail petition was not decided on merits and for this reason, the same is maintainable. 7. A perusal of the order dated 21.05.2026 passed by this Court in CRM- M-29241 of 2026 reveals that first bail petition for pre-arrest bail was got dismissed as withdrawn. The said order passed by this Court is reproduced as under:- “The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BNSS seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 58 dated 28.03.2026 under Section 69 BNS, 2023 registered at Police Station Cheeka, District Kaithal. 2. At the outset, Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate has put in appearance and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions 3. After vehemently arguing on the merits of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions from the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the instant petition and has volunteered that the petitioner is ready to surrender before the trial Court. He further prayed that a direction be issued to the trial Court that, in case the petitioner applies for regular bail, the same be decided expeditiously and preferably within a period of three days. 4. Learned State counsel assisted by the counsel for the complainant did not object to the same but submit that the said bail application should be decided on its own merits and not guided by the present order. 5. Considering the above request and in light of the volunteered statement of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to surrender, he may do so on or before 23.05.2026 and in case, the petitioner applies for regular bail thereafter, the same be decided expeditiously, preferably on or before 29.05.2026. 6. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. ANJAL GUPTA 2026.07.08 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33603-2026 -3- 7. However, it is made clear that this order shall not be construed as any direction of granting or not granting a bail and the said application shall be considered on its own merits, in accordance with law and without being influenced by this order. 8. Pending appication(s), if any, stands disposed of.” 8. This order Annexure P-6 makes it crystal clear that the first bail petition for pre-arrest bail was got dismissed as withdrawn because the volunteered statement of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to surrender before the learned Trial Court and prayed that direction be issued to the Trial Court that in case he applies for regular bail, the same be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 days. 9. In view of the volunteered request, that petition was dismissed as withdrawn and a Coordinate Bench of this Court also directed that the learned Trial Court to decide his bail application when he applies for the regular bail on or before 29.05.2026, as he expressed his willingness to surrneder before the Trial Court may be on or before 23.05.2026. 10. The petitioner has failed to explain the circumstances that prevented him to abide by the order dated 21.05.2026, i.e., his inability to comply with the said order. Unless he explains the circumstances regarding his inability to comply with the said order, he is not entitled to the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail, especially when this order was passed only on the volunteered request of the petitioiner to surrender before the learned Trial Court, and to direct the learned Trial Court to decide his application for regular bail expeditiously and preferably within a period of 03 days. 11. In view of the aforesaid observation, the petitioner is not entitled for discretionary relief of a pre-arrest bail and is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to abide with the directions as is made in paragraph-5 of said order dated 21.05.2026 passed by this Court in CRM-M-29241 of 2026 by surrendering before the Trial Court within a period of 10 days from today and in case he moves an application for regular bail, which shall be decided by the learned Trial Court expeditiously, but not later than 03 days of filing of such application. 03.07.2026 (RAMESH KUMARI) Anjal JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ANJAL GUPTA 2026.07.08 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document