CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) -:1:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (170) CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:15.07.2026 ARUN … Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate and Mr. Sushil Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Pawan Kumar Hooda, Advocate, Mr. Sumit Ruhal, Advocate and Mr. Manya Anand, Advocate for the complainant. -.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) 1. The present petition, being the first under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), has been filed seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 73 dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-1), registered under Sections 110, 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 253(B), 329(3), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 308, 323, 324, 326, 341, 216, 447, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at Police Station Jhojhu Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) -:2:- 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case, as emerging from the FIR, is that the complainant, Raj Kumar son of Ram Singh, alleged that on 12.05.2026, at about 8:30 a.m., he, along with his father Ram Singh, brother Sanjay and nephew Mangesh, had gone to their agricultural land situated in village Palari, where they allegedly found the accused persons, namely Satbir, Arun and Ajay, installing poles and electric wires over the disputed land with the intention of taking forcible possession thereof. It is further alleged that while the complainant party was returning from the fields and had reached near Baba Banwari Dass Temple, Satbir and his son Arun, each armed with an axe, intercepted and forcibly stopped their vehicle. Satbir is alleged to have inflicted an axe blow on the head of the complainant, whereas Arun allegedly assaulted Ram Singh by giving an axe blow on his head. In the meantime, co-accused Ajay allegedly arrived at the spot on a motorcycle carrying a jaily (sharp-edged weapon) and caused injuries to Sanjay. Upon the complainant party raising an alarm, Ravi Parkash and Mangesh reached the spot and intervened, whereupon the accused persons allegedly fled after extending threats of dire consequences. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present FIR came to be registered. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated on account of a long-standing civil dispute pertaining to joint agricultural land between close relatives. It is contended that the allegations incorporated in the FIR are highly exaggerated, motivated and have been levelled with the sole object of exerting pressure upon the petitioner and his family in relation to the disputed property. It is further submitted that both parties GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) -:3:- are admittedly co-sharers in the land in question and the criminal proceedings have been initiated as a counterblast to the existing civil dispute. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a serving member of the Indian Army, presently posted in a forward operational area in the Jammu and Kashmir. It is argued that despite the serious allegations levelled in the FIR, no overt act or specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner. His implication is stated to be omnibus and without any supporting material. It is further contended that warrants have been forwarded to the petitioner's Commanding Officer solely on account of his official posting; however, the petitioner has never intended to evade the process of law and is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Agency or by this Court. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner enjoys unblemished antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal case. On these premises, it is prayed that the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail be extended to the petitioner. 3.1. Notice of motion. 4. At the very outset, Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Mr. Pawan Kumar Hooda, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed his power of attorney, which is taken on record. Learned State counsel, as well as learned counsel appearing for the complainant, have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and have prayed for dismissal of the present petition. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) -:4:- 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have carefully perused the pleadings, the paper book and the material available on record with their able assistance. 6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have carefully examined the material available on record. At this stage, the allegations levelled against the petitioner cannot be said to be vague or omnibus. Rather, the petitioner has been assigned a specific and overt role in the commission of the alleged offence. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have inflicted an axe blow on the head of the injured Ram Singh. The head is undoubtedly one of the most vital and vulnerable parts of the human body, and the alleged assault is stated to have been carried out with a sharp-edged and deadly weapon, thereby prima facie reflecting the seriousness and gravity of the occurrence. 6.1. The nature of the accusation, the specific role attributed to the petitioner, the weapon allegedly used, and the part of the body targeted are all relevant considerations while adjudicating a prayer for anticipatory bail. At this stage of the investigation, this Court is not expected to undertake a meticulous appreciation of the evidence or record any finding on the truthfulness of the allegations. Nevertheless, the material presently available discloses a prima facie case warranting custodial investigation. Grant of the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail in the facts of the present case may impede the course of a fair and effective investigation, particularly when the allegations disclose the commission of a grave and serious offence involving violence. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38184-2026 (O&M) -:5:- 6.2. The considerations relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner, including the existence of a civil dispute between the parties and the petitioner's service in the Indian Army, are matters which shall undoubtedly be available for consideration during the course of trial or at any subsequent appropriate stage. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, such considerations are not sufficient to dilute the gravity of the allegations or to justify the exercise of the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 6.3. Accordingly, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific role attributed to the petitioner, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case lest it may prejudice either party during the course of investigation or trial, this Court is of the considered view that no case for grant of the concession of anticipatory bail is made out. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. 7. In view of the fact that the principal matter stands finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising out of or ancillary to the present proceedings, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. No separate or further orders are required to be passed in respect thereof. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 15.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.15 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document