CRM-M-36192-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.285 CRM-M-36192-2026 Date of Decision: 12.08.2026 RAJ SINGH NARUKA ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Sanyam Khetarpal, Advocate and Ms. Kajal Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Saroha, DAG, Haryana. ***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.17 dated 19.01.2026, registered under Sections 316(2), 108/62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Bhupani, District Faridabad. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant, while working at Metro Hospital, Sector-16, Faridabad, came in contact with the petitioner in the year 2022 and, as per her own version, entered into a relationship with him of her own free will. It is alleged that during the subsistence of the relationship, she had given cash and gold jewellery to the petitioner and that, subsequently, the petitioner retained her private photographs/videos and started sending the same to her family members and threatening to make them viral. On the basis of the said complaint, the FIR came to be registered. ANU 2026.08.12 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36192-2026 2 During investigation, the statement of the complainant was recorded and the petitioner was arrested on 27.02.2026. His mobile phone was recovered. Subsequently, on the basis of the complainant’s statement recorded after her attempt to take her life on 26.02.2026, Sections 108/62 of the BNS were added. The investigation stands completed and challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court. The petitioner is in custody since 27.02.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the prosecution’s own case reflects that the relationship between the parties was consensual and continued for about two years. It is contended that the subsequent addition of Sections 108/62 of the BNS is based upon allegations made subsequently and the material collected during investigation does not prima facie establish the essential ingredients of the said offences. It is further submitted that there are material inconsistencies regarding the alleged payment made to the petitioner, as the initial complaint refers to approximately 4,00,000/-, whereas the ₹ subsequent statement refers to 30,000/- to 40,000/- in cash besides ₹ ₹ jewellery. Learned counsel submits that the investigation is complete, challan has been presented and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation. It is also submitted that none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. The petitioner has clean antecedents and undertakes to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has produced the status report dated 10.08.2026, which is taken on record and opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and is ANU 2026.08.12 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36192-2026 3 the main accused. It is submitted that the material collected during investigation, including the Instagram chats, prima facie supports the allegations regarding circulation of the complainant’s obscene photographs/ videos and threats extended to her. Learned State counsel further submits that the gold jewellery allegedly taken from the complainant has not been recovered and that, following her alleged attempt to take her life, Sections 108/62 of the BNS were added. It is contended that the complainant and other material witnesses are yet to be examined and, therefore, there is an apprehension of the petitioner influencing the witnesses or otherwise hampering the trial. It is also pointed out that the petitioner’s earlier application for regular bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide order dated 30.05.2026. Dismissal of the present petition is accordingly prayed for. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 6. The allegations against the petitioner, particularly insofar as the subsequent addition of Sections 108/62 of the BNS is concerned, relate to the alleged abetment of the complainant’s attempt to take her own life. Whether the conduct attributed to the petitioner satisfies the ingredients of abetment is ultimately a matter which would require appreciation of the evidence during trial. At this stage, this Court is not required to undertake a detailed examination of the evidence or record any final opinion on the merits of the case. It is also relevant that the relationship between the parties is stated to have continued for about two years. The petitioner has pointed out material inconsistencies regarding the alleged payments made to him. While the initial complaint refers to payment of approximately ANU 2026.08.12 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36192-2026 4 Rs.4,00,000/-, the subsequent statement refers to payment of Rs.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/- in cash besides jewellery. The effect and evidentiary value of these discrepancies would be a matter for consideration during trial. 7. The petitioner has been in custody since 27.02.2026 and has already undergone custody of 4 months and 19 days. The investigation stands completed and challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court. Thus, the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation. Further, none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far and the trial is, therefore, likely to take considerable time to conclude. 8. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances, particularly the nature of the allegations, the custody period already undergone by the petitioner, completion of investigation, presentation of challan, the fact that custodial interrogation is no longer required, the material inconsistencies pointed out regarding the alleged payments and the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner, Raj Singh Naruka, is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds and one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly attempt to influence, threaten or induce the complainant or any other prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the evidence. He shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is specifically exempted in accordance with law. ANU 2026.08.12 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36192-2026 5 10. It is clarified that none of the observations made herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, and the learned Trial Court shall decide the case independently on the basis of the evidence led before it. 11. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 12.08.2026 JUDGE Anu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ANU 2026.08.12 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh