← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/31675/2025dismissed

Rakesh v. State Of Haryana

2025-07-07Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal2 pages

CRM-M-31675-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31675-2025 Date of decision : 07.07.2025 RAKESH ... PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Jangvir Singh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. (Through video conferencing) Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl.A.G, Haryana. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

The petitioner has come up before this Court under Section 482 BNSS seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.54 dated 27.04.2025 under Sections 25, 54, 59 of Arms Act registered at Police Station Loharu District Bhiwani. 2.

Brief facts of the case are that a secret information was received by the Police that co-accused Digpal @ Dipu, who has been declared as proclaimed offender has been looking for a place to go with an illegal gun and has been standing on Pilani Road in front of Nawab's Kothi in Loharu. If a raid gets conducted, he can be caught red handed with illegal weapons. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been wrongfully implicated in the current case, as he was not directly involved in the FIR. However, the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co-accused, Digpal, who claimed that the petitioner supplied him with illegal weapons for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. Renu Rawat 2025.07.12 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-31675-2025 -24.

Learned State counsel has filed the reply in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He has opposed the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is involved in five more cases although he has been acquitted in three of those cases. 5.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

6.

Keeping in view the above, the antecedents of the petitioner do not establish any case for anticipatory bail and his custodial interrogation would be required, hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. (H.S.GREWAL) JUDGE 07.07.2025 renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2025.07.12 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document