IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Jasmer Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent

1. The date when the judgment is reserved 09.02.2026 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 13.02.2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the 13.02.2026 website

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full Not applicable judgment, and reasons thereof CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Yagsimant Attri, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State.

Mr. Suresh Nain, Advocate, for the complainant.

***

MANISHA BATRA , J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking anticipatory bail in the FIR mentioned below:-

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

725 03.08.2025 Panipat City,108 and 308 of the District Panipat Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”)

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of complaint submitted by the complainant Parveen Kumar alleging that the relations between his father-in-law Karan and his brother Dalel were strained due to which altercations used to take place between them. On 03.08.2025, his father-in-law informed his brother-in-law Vikrant that Jyoti daughter of Dalel had borrowed a sum of Rs.20 lakhs from Karan and had not been returning the same. On raising demand of money, the family members of Dalel including the petitioner who is a friend of co-accused Jyoti, made him consume some intoxicant, prepared an objectionable video and on the basis of the same, they had been blackmailing him from the past two years. They had also been raising demand of Rs.50 lakhs in cash. He alleged that due to stress, his father-in-law had committed suicide on that very day. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat on 19.08.2025.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no material whatsoever on record to connect the petitioner with the allegations so levelled. No complaint had been filed by the deceased with regard to his being blackmailed by the co-accused and himself. The ingredients for commission of subject offences are not attracted qua him. He is ready to join investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from him. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Status report has been filed. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the deceased had left a suicide note wherein specific allegations were levelled by the victim against the petitioner as well and the same establish that due to harassment meted out at the hands of the petitioner and other accused, the victim had ended his life. The allegations make out a case for commission of subject offences against the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is must for conducting thorough investigation in the matter. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5. This Court has considered the rival submissions.

6. The petitioner is alleged to have abetted suicide by the victim. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 108 of BNS, undoubtedly, there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, a person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide, must have played an active role by act of instigation and doing certain acts to facilitate the commission of suicide. Allegations of hara