IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 05.02.2026 XXXXX ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. P.S. Hundal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gursahib Singh Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Saumya Ahluwalia, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate and Mr. Akhil Godara, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL)

The instant petition under Section 483(3) of BNSS has been filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the Coordinate Bench of this Court to respondent No.2 in case FIR No.280 dated 10.06.2024 under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station, Dabua, District Faridabad vide impugned order dated 08.08.2024 passed in CRM-M-32284-2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court had granted the concession of anticipatory bail to respondent No.2, in view of the fact that he has joined investigation, after imposing certain conditions. However, respondent No.2 has violated the condition as mentioned in sub-section (ii) of Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C, and he had made contact with the petitioner directly by messaging her on her WhatsApp number several times. Respondent No.2 even made calls to the petitioner, as can be evinced from Annexures P-3 and P-4. He, therefore, submits that the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner deserves to be cancelled.

3. The learned State counsel submits that this Court after due consideration of the facts of the case and the evidence adduced, allowed the petition/application filed before it.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case record with their able assistance.

5. Perusal of the record reveals that it was only after respondent No.2 had joined and cooperated in the investigation, that his petition for anticipatory bail was allowed on 08.08.2024 with respect to the alleged violation of the conditions for granting bail. It has also come on record that the petitioner had moved a complaint/representation before Police Station Dabua, Faridabad, which was thoroughly inquired into, whereupon the complaint was found to be false. It was also also concluded that the dispute between the parties was of a civil nature, thus no action was required to be taken on the complaint/representation. Relevant portion of the status report dated 03.10.2025 wherein the same has been mentioned, reads thus:-

“17. That it is humbly submitted that complaint/representation bearing No. 1004-5P-II dated 10.12.24 registered at Police Station Dabua, Faridabad)/280-5P-II dated 14.12.24 registered at Police Post Sainik Colony, Faridabad (Annexure P-5), made by petitioner was enquired by ASI Vipin Kumar, Police Post Sainik Colony. During the enquiry, the complainant side and respondent side were joined and their statements were recorded, in which, the petitioner stated that Veer Sain (respondent No.2) and his family members came to her house and beat her and tried to break the locks and gate of her house. She called the police by calling DIAL 112. Accused respondent No.2 stated that he knew petitioner 'N' since 2016 and due to this both the parties took a house jointly and gave other things like mobile, scooty etc. after that petitioner 'N' registered a case against him bearing FIR No. 280 dated 10/06/2024, U/s. 376(2)(N), 506 IPC at Police Station Dabua Faridabad, for which challan has been filed in the Hon'ble Court, the case regarding House No. 3012- J-Block, Sainik Colony, Faridabad, is pending in the Civil Court of Hon'ble Ms. Ramnik Kaur, JMIC, Faridabad, he has not beaten up 'N' nor tried to break the locks and gates of the house, the application she has filed against him is false, ASI Vipin Kumar observed complaints and statements, a case pending in the Civil Court, no fight and quarrel has been found, the petitioner was asked to present evidence in relation to the above complaints but no evidence has be