Axxxx @ Dxxxx v. State Of Haryana

-:1:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (202) Date of Decision:02.07.2026 AXXXX @ DXXXX ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.-

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Gursewak Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

-.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) 1.

The instant petition, being the first one under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to erstwhile Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), has been instituted by the petitioner seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.0499 dated 25.10.2025, registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 126(2), 351(3) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Mujessar, District Faridabad. It is further noticed that Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was added subsequently during the course of investigation. The petitioner accordingly prays that, in the event of his arrest in the aforesaid case, he be enlarged on anticipatory bail in accordance with law.

-:2:- 2.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.10.2025, information was received regarding the admission of injured Dinesh Gupta to Max Stone Hospital, Faridabad, following an alleged assault. The Investigating Officer collected the medico-legal record; however, the injured was declared unfit to make a statement. Subsequently, on 25.10.2025, the complainant alleged that on the intervening night of 12/13.10.2025, while returning home with his friend after attending a Mata Ka Jagran, he was intercepted by the present applicant and other coaccused, along with 15-20 unidentified persons, who allegedly assaulted him with dandas, fists, and kicks, causing serious injuries and extending threats to his life. During investigation, the site plan was prepared, statements of witnesses were recorded, and CCTV footage was collected. On the basis of the medical opinion, Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was added to the FIR. Apprehending his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, the applicant has preferred the present petition seeking the concession of anticipatory bail. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that the applicant is a juvenile in conflict with law. It is further contended that the allegations levelled against the applicant are general and omnibus in nature, and no specific overt act or individual injury has been attributed to him in the prosecution case.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties at considerable length and have carefully perused the paper-book as well as the material placed on record with their able assistance.

-:3:- 5.

Having bestowed my thoughtful consideration upon the rival submissions and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly the admitted status of the applicant-petitioner as a juvenile in conflict with law, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately served by directing the applicant-petitioner to avail the statutory remedy available before the competent Juvenile Justice Board. Accordingly, the applicant-petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned Juvenile Justice Board and file an appropriate application seeking regular bail within a period of 15 days from today. In the event such an application is preferred within the stipulated period, the concerned Juvenile Justice Board shall consider and decide the same, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within seven days from the date of its filing, without being influenced by any observation made herein. 5.1.

It is further directed that, until the said bail application is adjudicated upon by the Juvenile Justice Board, and provided the applicant-petitioner files the same within the aforesaid period of 15 days, no coercive action shall be taken against him, and he shall not be arrested in connection with the present FIR. It is, however, clarified that this interim protection shall automatically cease to operate in the event the applicant-petitioner fails to approach the Juvenile Justice Board within the time stipulated hereinabove.

5.2.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

6.

Since the principal matter stands finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising out of, connected with,

-:4:- or ancillary to the present proceedings, shall stand disposed of in terms of the present order. No further or separate orders are warranted in respect thereof.

( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 02.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No