Aabid v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 29.05.2026 AABID .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA .....RESPONDENT
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present:
Ms. Rosi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.
Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District No.
(s) Aabid, aged 08.12.2025 303(2) of BNS (corresponding to section 379 of IPC) Sadar Tauru Nuh about 32 years 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that allegations pertain to the alleged theft of one buffalo, one one-month-old calf, one three-year-old calf, and a cow from the complainant's house. It is further submitted that name of the present petitioner has surfaced in the case, solely on the basis of a disclosure statement made by the main accused namely Sarif, Ashik and Hasan.
-23.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that since other cases are already registered against the petitioner, he is known to the police officials, and in an attempt to inflate the number of cases against him, he has been roped in as an accused in the present matter. It is further submitted that, apart from the disclosure statement of the co-accused, no independent or substantive evidence has been collected by the prosecution to establish the petitioner's involvement in the present case.
Lastly, it is contended that petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and to fully cooperate with the investigating agency. Thus, counsel prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.
4.
Notice of motion.
5.
On advance notice, Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, learned Senior DAG, Haryana, appears on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender and is allegedly involved in illegal cattle trade.
It is further submitted that, in the present case, there are specific and direct allegations attributing the role of the petitioner, making him the principal accused in the said illegal trade. Thus, it is contended that he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the present case.
6.
However, on being asked by this Court, he is unable to explain whether any corroborative evidence, apart from the disclosure
-3statement, has been collected by the prosecution against the petitioner, during the course of investigation, after the arrest of co-accused. 7.
This Court has heard the submissions addressed by counsel for the parties and has also gone through the record available before it. 8.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it necessary to keep the present petition pending any further and, accordingly, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same, with the direction to the petitioner to join the investigation within two weeks from today or as and when called by the investigating officer, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 9.
Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 10.
With the directions recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) 29.05.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No