IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

213 CRM-M-43643-2025 Date of Decision : 05.12.2025 GYAN CHAND AND OTHERS ...Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. Alisha Soni, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vishal Singh, AAG, Haryana assisted by ASI Satish Kumar.

****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL)

1. This petition for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by petitioners, co-accused in case bearing FIR No.395 dated 28.06.2024 registered against him at Police Station Adarsh Nagar, District Faridabad, u/s 420, 120-B IPC.

2. Status Report dated 13.10.2025 by way of affidavit of Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ballabgarh Zone, Faridabad, filed on behalf of respondent-State has already been placed on record. In para 13 thereof, the admitted.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that similarly situated accused have already been granted the concession of pre-arrest bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-7829-2025 and CRM-M-36020-2025, vide orders dated 12.05.2025 & 21.07.2025, respectively.

On a pointed query raised by this Court, as to whether the aforesaid orders have been assailed by the State, learned State counsel replied in negative.

3. On 29.09.2025, following order was passed.

“1. By virtue of present petition filed under Section 482 BNSS, petitioners, who are accused in case bearing FIR No.395 dated 28.06.2024 registered under Sections 420,120-B IPC at P.S Adarsh Nagar, District Faridabad, have prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail.

2. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Satish Kumar, submits that petitioner Nos.1 to 5 namely Gyan Chand, Om Prakash, Harswroop, Kehar Singh and Rajbir Singh have joined the investigation and their presence is not needed for custodial interrogation. So far as petitioner No.6 is concerned, he did not report to the Investigating Officer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner No.6 Rakesh Kumar could not join investigation on account of having suffered fracture in his hand. He, therefore, prays for grant of one more opportunity to join the investigation. Learned counsel submits that the presence of petitioner Nos.1 to 5 is not needed for custodial interrogation and thus, the concession of interim anticipatory bail granted earlier to them be confirmed.

5. Heard.

6. Keeping in view the above submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners as also the fact that petitioner Nos.1 to 5 have joined the investigation, interim bail granted vide order dated 27.08.2025 is hereby confirmed qua petitioner Nos.1 to 5 only, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. They shall also join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; they will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

or before the next date of hearing.

8. Adjourned to 17/10/25.”

4. Keeping in view the fact that petitioner No.6 has joined the investigation, interim bail granted vide order dated 29.09.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS. Further petitioner No.6 is directed to join investigation as and when required in future by way of written notice for such purpose to be served by Investigating Officer of this case upon the petitioner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

5. The petition stands allowed.

6. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY)

JUDGE

05.12.2025

Nisha Yadav

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No