CRM-M-28845-2026 1 211 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28845-2026 Date of Decision: 14.07.2026 GAURAV ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Senior DAG, Haryana VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)/Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 67 dated 27.02.2023, registered at Police Station Sadar, Ambala, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341, 379-B, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, corresponding to Sections 191(3), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 304, 324 and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Annexure P-1). 2. As per the prosecution, the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Sanjay Kumar, who alleged that on 27.02.2023 at about 3:15 PM, while he was going on his motorcycle, around 10-15 persons travelling in two cars and armed with iron pipes and swords attacked him. It is alleged that the accused persons restrained his way, caused injuries to him, ₹ snatched an amount of 15,000/- from his possession and damaged his mobile phone. The present petitioner Gaurav has been specifically attributed the role of causing a blow with a chain/garari on the right arm of the complainant. On KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.15 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-28845-2026 2 the basis of the said allegations, present FIR was registered and during investigation, the petitioner was nominated as an accused. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no role in the alleged occurrence. It is contended that the FIR contains general allegations against a large number of persons and the petitioner has been assigned a stereotyped role without any independent corroboration. Learned counsel submits that except the statement of the complainant, there is no material available on record connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence. 3.1 It is further submitted that the allegation regarding snatching of ₹15,000/- is a general allegation against a group of persons and no recovery of any amount or weapon is to be effected from the petitioner. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and undertake to abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court. 3.2 Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is a young person, has deep roots in society, and there is no possibility of his absconding or influencing the witnesses. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not been declared a proclaimed offender in the present case and the alleged involvement in other cases would not disentitle him from seeking protection of anticipatory bail. 3.3 Learned counsel, therefore, prays that considering the nature of allegations, absence of recovery, and the petitioner's undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, the petitioner be granted the concession of anticipatory bail. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.15 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-28845-2026 3 4 Status report by way of affidavit of DSP, (Hqs) Ambala, on behalf of respondent/State has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record, copy of the same has been supplied to the counsel opposite. 5 Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR and a specific role has been attributed to him. It is contended that the petitioner was armed with a chain (garari) and inflicted a blow on the right arm of the complainant, while he, along with other armed persons, intercepted the complainant, caused injuries, damaged his mobile phone and snatched ₹15,000/- from him. 5.1 Learned State counsel submits that the allegations disclose a serious occurrence involving unlawful assembly, use of weapons and commission of offences relating to hurt, robbery and criminal intimidation. It is further submitted that the role attributed to the petitioner is not merely of presence but of active participation in the alleged occurrence. 5.2 Learned State counsel has also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is not a person with clean antecedents. It has been pointed out that apart from the present FIR, the petitioner is also involved in another criminal case, i.e. FIR No. 115 dated 28.02.2022, registered at Police Station Ambala City, wherein, as per the information furnished by the petitioner himself, he has been declared as a Proclaimed Offender vide order dated 06.08.2024 passed by the competent Court. 5.3 Learned State counsel further submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for the purpose of investigation and recovery of the weapon used in the occurrence. It is argued that the petitioner KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.15 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-28845-2026 4 does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail considering the nature of allegations and his conduct. Learned State counsel, therefore, prays for dismissal of the present petition. 6. The aforesaid fact assumes significance while considering the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail, as the conduct of an accused and his willingness to submit to the process of law are relevant considerations. The fact that the petitioner has been declared a Proclaimed Offender in another criminal case raises a legitimate apprehension regarding his availability during the course of investigation and trial. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR and a specific role has been attributed to him of causing injury to the complainant with a chain (garari). The allegations indicate his active participation in the alleged occurrence involving unlawful assembly, use of weapons, causing injuries, snatching of money and damage to property. Further, the alleged weapon used in the occurrence is yet to be recovered. The conduct of the petitioner also assumes significance, as he has been declared a Proclaimed Offender in another criminal case, i.e. FIR No. 115 dated 28.02.2022, registered at Police Station Ambala City, which reflects upon his conduct and willingness to submit to the process of law. 7. In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific role attributed to the petitioner, the requirement of investigation and recovery, and his antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner cannot be said to be unwarranted at this stage. Accordingly, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for extending the extraordinary discretionary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.15 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-28845-2026 5 8. Consequently, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed. However, it is clarified that nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, and the learned Trial Court shall decide the matter independently, in accordance with law, on the basis of the evidence brought on record. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 14.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.15 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh