IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Pinki ……Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Haryana and another ……Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Ankit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Dushyant Godara, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*****

Sumeet Goel (Oral):

1. Apprehending her arrest in FIR No.69 dated 24.01.2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC at Police Station Hansi City, District Hisar; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. On 05.08.2025, the following order was passed:

“Apprehending her arrest in FIR No.69 dated 24.01.2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120- B IPC at Police Station Hansi City, District Hisar; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.

Counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the genesis of the FIR in question is of a civil dispute/loan transaction, the present FIR has been lodged in a malafide manner so as to arm twist the petitioner, no effective recovery is to be made from the petitioner & the petitioner is willing to join investigation and cooperate therein.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 08.08.2025 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to her furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when further called by Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall join the investigation. She shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.”

3. Learned State counsel (on instructions from ASI Jogender) has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation but her custodial interrogation is required for effecting recovery of the money in question.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and in case the petitioner is extended the concession of anticipatory bail, there is all the likelihood that she may abscond from the process of justice and she may interfere with the relevant witnesses.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the rival parties and upon perusal of the record, especially keeping in view the factum of petitioner being a lady and having joined investigation & her custodial interrogation is being sought primarily on the ground that recovery of money is not effected, this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 05.08.2025 granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.

6. Ordered accordingly.

7. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

8. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

9. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL)

August 28, 2025 JUDGE

Naveen

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether Reportable : Yes/No