IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.13902 of 2025 Date of Decision: 12.03.2025 Nasir Hussain ….. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ….. Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present: Mr. Baljeet Beniwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

*****

RAJESH BHARDWAJ J.

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.716, dated 17.12.2024, under Sections 305(A), 318, 3(5) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Mujessar, Faridabad, District Faridabad.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Vishnu Aggarwal. It was alleged that he had a godown at Sarurpur Friends Complex, Faridabad and owned a company, namely, Alloys Pvt. Ltd. where he is carrying on the work pertaining to the scrap work. On 16.12.2024, about 42 ton of aluminum scrap was unloaded in his godown. However when he came to his godown on 17.12.2024 at about 9:00 A.M., he saw 15-20 ton of aluminum scrap having been stolen. It was alleged that some unknown persons have stolen the aluminum scrap and hence the request was made to register the case and legal action be taken. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner was prima facie found by the Investigating Agencies and thus he was arrayed as an accused. Efforts for his arrest were made, however he could not be arrested. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad praying for the grant of anticipatory bail. However, after hearing both the sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad declined the petition filed by the petitioner vide his order dated 05.03.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of bail by way of filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He has submitted that during the investigation, accused, namely, Sagar was arrested and on his disclosure statement, another accused, namely, Sarwan Singh was arrested. He has submitted that on the disclosure statement of co-accused, now the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in the present case. He has submitted that the disclosure statement of co-accused is not an admissible evidence. He has further submitted that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. He has thus submitted that no prima facie case has been made out against the petitioner and hence his custodial interrogation is not required. However the petitioner is ready to join the investigation. He has thus submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On asking of the Court, Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the theft of 15-20 ton of aluminum scrap was committed as is evident from the allegations made in the FIR. He has submitted that the investigation is already in progress and some of the accused are arrested and complicity of the petitioner has been found during the investigation. He has submitted that the petitioner is also one of the accused in committing the alleged offence and thus his custodial interrogation is required for a free and fair investigation. He has submitted that no case for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out and thus the present petition being devoid of merit deserves to be dismissed.

6. Heard.

7. On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that FIR in the present case was registered on 17.12.2024. As per the allegations, 15-20 ton of aluminum scrap was stolen from