IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

201 CRM-M-6000-2026 RAMESH KUMAR ....PETITIONER V/s STATE OF HARYANA ....RESPONDENT Date of decision: 16.04.2026 Date of uploading: 16.04.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Advocate, for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL , J . ORAL

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 340 dated 15.10.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of IPC and Sections 464, 467, 468, 471 of IPC added later on, at Police Station Ellenabad, District Sirsa.

2. On 23.03.2026, the following order was passed:-

“Inter alia contends that the FIR in question has been registered after an unexplained delay of 03 years, the case in hand is primarily based on documentary evidence, & the petitioner is willing to join investigation and cooperate therein.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 26.03.2026 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when further called by Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.”

3. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has stated that pursuant to the order dated 23.03.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation.

3.1 Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are direct/serious in nature and hence he ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. He has further iterated that in case the petitioner is extended the concession of anticipatory bail, there is all the likelihood that he may interfere with the investigation as also intimidate the investigation/witnesses.

4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated therein and is no longer required by the State for further custodial interrogation, this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 23.03.2026, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.

5. Ordered accordingly.

6. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

7. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

8. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

jatin