Anita v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 07.08.2025 ANITA .... PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA .... RESPONDENT CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present :

Mr. Samay Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Vijay Sangwan, Advocate and Mr. Aryavart, Advocate for the complainant.

**** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.191 dated 18.10.2024, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 110, 115(2), 333, 351 (2), 117(2) of BNS registered at Police Station Jhojhu Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no direct allegation against her causing any injury. He further submitted that there is no recovery of any weapon or incriminating material from her. The petitioner is not alleged to have inflicted any injury on the complainant or other victims. The petitioner has been in custody since 21.10.2024. The prolonged incarceration without trial violates the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a young woman of

-2clean antecedents, has no criminal background, and has not been declared a proclaimed offender. This is her first involvement in this criminal case. A compromise has been effected between the parties and they are neighbourers. The petitioner undertakes to abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon'ble Court and assures that she will not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, or abscond during trial. 3.

Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner and submits that in case the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail, she will misuse the same. He has filed her custody certificate, which is taken on record. 4.

Mr. Aryavart, Advocate appeared on behalf of the complainant/injured and filed an affidavit duly sworn by the complainant, which is taken on record, to the effect that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and he does not want to pursue any further legal action against the accused.

5.

Heard.

5.

In view of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for over 09 months 15 days, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 6.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 7.

However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misses any date of hearing without making any application seeking exemption from her

-3personal appearance before the learned trial Court or delay the trial, the bail granted to her shall stand cancelled.

07.08. 2025 (SUBHAS MEHLA) Anju JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No