High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/3562/2025disposed of

Sanjay Kumar Alias Sikender v. State Of Haryana

2025-02-21Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3562-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.02.2025 Sanjay Kumar @ Sikender ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.651 dated 25.12.2024 under Sections 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 10 & 24 of Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Kurukshetra University, District Kurukshetra 2.

On 22.01.2025, the following order was passed:- " XX XX XX XX Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that in fact, the petitioner is brother-in-law of the complainant and marriage between the petitioner and sister of the complainant took place without consent and approval of the complainant. Further, offences under Sections 406 & 420 of IPC cannot be invoked simultaneously. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, as nothing is to be recovered from him. Moreover, the maximum sentence provided for the offences,

under which the FIR (supra) is registered, is punishable upto 07 years. No notice under Section 35 of BNSS [erstwhile Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.')] has been served upon the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner is having clean antecedents and he is not involved in any other case.

Notice of motion for 21.02.2025.

Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer.

The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.) If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court.

Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law."

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Krishan Kumar, at the very outset, informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required. 4.

In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated 22.01.2025 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). 5.

The petition stands disposed of.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 21.02.2025 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No