IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

230 CRM-M-60803-2025 Date of decision: 13.11.2025 Date of Uploading: 13.11.2025 Mohd. Jakir ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Ravi Ambawata, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana.

None for respondent No.2.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483(2) read with Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking cancellation of regular bail granted to respondent No.2 vide order dated 22.09.2025 (Annexure P-4) passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal in FIR No.72 dated 08.08.2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of BNS, 2023 at Police Station Utawar, District Palwal.

2. The relevant portion of the order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal, reads as under:

“10. Keeping in view the above reason and discussion, bail application is allowed and applicant (Nayyum) is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty magistrate concerned. Copy of this order be sent to learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. Copy of this order be sent to concerned Superintendent District Jail through email.

11. No expression of this order shall be construed to be an opinion upon the merits of the case. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Court below has erred in granting bail to the respondent No.2 despite the gravity and seriousness of the offence. Learned counsel has further iterated that the respondent No.2, in connivance with one Khushnuma, prepared a forged and fabricated Nikahnama by gorging the signatures of the petitioner and falsely showing his presence as a witness to a marriage of which he has no knowledge. According to learned counsel, after being released on regular bail vide impugned order, the respondent No.2 has been threatening and pressurizing the petitioner to compromise the matter. Learned counsel has further submitted that the Court below has failed to appreciate the gravity of the offence, the possibility of the accused interfering with the investigation and the potential threat to the life of the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the seriousness of the offence involving forgery of a legal document outweighs the factor of absence of previous criminal antecedents. It has been further argued that the impugned order has been passed in a mechanical manner without application of mind. Thus, keeping in view the gravity of offence, cancellation of the regular bail granted to respondent No.2 is entreated for.

4. Pursuant to order of the preceding date, learned State counsel has filed reply dated 07.11.2025 by way of affidavit of Mohinder Singh, HPS Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hathin, District Palwal has been filed by the State of Haryana; relevant whereof reads as under:-

“3. That after registration of the present FIR, the initial investigation of the case was conducted by SI Mahesh Kumar, during which the statements of the witnesses were recorded. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was taken over by Inspector/SHO Renudevi, Police Station Uttawar, District Palwal. During the course of investigation, sufficient evidence was found against accused Nayum (respondent No. 2) son of Israil, resident of Roopdaka, Police Station Uttawar, District Palwal, making him liable for arrest. Accordingly, on 20.08.2025, the accused Nayum (respondent no. 2) was arrested as per rules and his disclosure statement was recorded. As per the disclosure statement, it was necessary to locate the house of the Maulvi who had prepared the forged Nikahnama, situated at Jurheda (Kaman), Rajasthan. Therefore, the accused (respondent no. 2) was produced before the Ld. Court on 21.08.2025 and two days of police remand was obtained. During police custody, the ac