Sanjeev Kumar @ Johny v. State Of Haryana

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.05.2026 SANJEEV KUMAR @ JOHNY ... Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY.

****

Present:

Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amrik Narwal, DAG, Haryana.

**** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) CRM-23021-2026 Allowed as prayed for.

The documents Annexures P-4 to P-7 are ordered to be taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place of the paper book.

MAIN CASE 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail for the petitioner in FIR No.266 dated 01.09.2025 registered under Sections 61 of the Excise Act, 2020 & Section 318(4) of the B.N.S. (Section 420 IPC) in which offences under Sections 338 B.N.S. (Section 467 IPC), 336(3) B.N.S. (Section 468 IPC), 340(2) B.N.S. (Section 471 IPC), 61(2) B.N.S. (120-B IPC) added

-2later on at Police Station Sadar Narwana, District Jind. 2.

On 25.05.2026, this Court had passed the following order:- "Learned Senior counsel submits that name of the petitioner surfaced based on the disclosure statement of coaccused Pradeep Kumar, who has since been granted anticipatory bail. He is unconnected to the said co-accused as there is no evidence with regard to the same. The phone number mentioned in the statement of co-accused Lakhwinder Singh also does not belong to the petitioner nor is he the owner of the truck. He is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate. Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. BS Saroha, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and files a status report, which is taken on record.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation on or before 27.05.2026. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 482(2) BNSS.

However, it is clarified that if the petitioner does not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.

Adjourned to 29.05.2026."

3.

Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner has not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case, the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, he shall make himself available without demur.

4.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Sukhdev Singh affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioner and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. 5.

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed

-3and the order dated 25.05.2026 granting interim bail to him, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (now 482(2) of BNSS, 2023) 6.

However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) MAY 29, 2026.

JUDGE Rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No