THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.48929 of 2025 Date of Decision: 02.09.2025 Anuraj ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present: Ms. Shweta, Advocate;

Mr. Aniket Singh, Advocate and Ms. Sonali Jain, 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.06, dated 06.01.2025, under Sections 182, 195, 196, 199, 200, 211, 384, 500 of IPC, registered at Police Station City Jhajjar, Haryana.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the petitioner had lodged the complaint against the complainant, namely, Virender and his family friends and on the basis of the same, FIR No.47, dated 06.05.2023, under Sections 323, 34, 344, 354-C, 376 and 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was registered. Statement of the petitioner was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. On conducting the investigation, it was found that the petitioner had lodged the FIR in order to extort money from the complainant. Thus, on conclusion of the investigation, the FIR registered by the petitioner was found to be false and baseless. Hence for registering the false FIR, the present FIR was registered. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar praying for the grant of anticipatory bail. However after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 24.07.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of false and frivolous allegations. She has submitted that the complainant, namely, Virender was the neighbour of petitioner, who gradually developed proximity with her. However, the petitioner realized about the complainant’s mala fide intentions. She has submitted that the complainant exploited the relationship with the petitioner and by making her unconscious, he committed rape upon her and captured obscene photographs and videos of her. She has submitted that the petitioner did not record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. voluntarily, rather it was under coercion. She has submitted that no prima facie case as alleged against the petitioner is made out and in the attending facts and circumstances, she deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On asking of the Court, Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

6. At this stage, Mr. Deepak Vashishta, Advocate has appeared and filed his power of attorney on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner is habitual of registering false and frivolous FIRs and on registration of the FIRs, she blackmail the helpless victims and extort heavy money from them. He has submitted that initially she lodged the case bearing FIR No.47, dated 06.05.2023, under Sections 323, 34, 344, 354-C, 376 and 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act against Virender, Anil and others, but the same was found to be false and frivolous. He has submitted that the petitioner demanded Rs.60 Lacs for withdrawal of the FIR by giving her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He has submitted that no ground for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out and thus, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She has submitted that the case is under investigation and thus no case for the grant