IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

203 CRM-M-49694-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.10.2025 Anil @ Bholu ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. Neeraj Sansaniwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. RK Jangra, AAG Haryana.

*****

AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 BNSS is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.44 dated 16.03.2023, registered under Section 109, 387, 506 of IPC, at Police Station Uchana, Jind.

2. On 05.09.2025, this Court had passed the following order:-

“Learned counsel contends that petitioner in the present FIR registered on 16.03.2023, since then he has been living in his village, has never been contacted by the police authorities wherein he has been sought to be implicated based on disclosure statement of co-accused who was granted regular bail by the trial Court after a custody of almost 40 days. There is nothing to connect him nor any recovery is required to be made from him. No other case is pending against him. He is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate.

Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. BS Saroha, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and affirms that factum of there being no case against the petitioner.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation on or before 11.09.2025. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

However, it is clarified that if the petitioner does not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.

Adjourned to 27.10.2025.”

3. Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner has not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, he shall make himself available without demur.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions from Investigating Officer affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioner and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation.

5. In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and the order dated 05.09.2025 granting interim bail to her, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(now 482(2) of BNSS, 2023

6. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY)

JUDGE

27.10.2025 Vishal Vardhan