← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32983/2025allowed

Ravi v. State Of Haryana

2025-09-02Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 02.09.2025 Ravi ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Kuldeep Singh Siwach, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, Sr. DAG Haryana.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

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 of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Ravi 17.08.2018 379, 411 of IPC 1860 Sadar Ratia Fatehabad 2.

Status report by way of an affidavit of Nar Singh, HPS Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ratia, District Fatehabad on behalf of respondent-State of Haryana in compliance of order dated 23.06.2025 has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

3.

On 23.06.2025, following order was passed:- "Present:

Mr. Kuldeep Singh Siwach, Advocate, for the petitioner.

* * * * 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 (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Ravi, aged about years 17.08.2018 379, 411 of IPC 1860 Sadar Ratia Fatehabad 2.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that FIR in the instant case was registered on 17.08.2018, and on submitting of the untraced report on 04.11.2018, same was accepted by the Court on 03.08.2019. On 06.04.2025, i.e., after a period of seven years, coaccused 'Aman' and 'Vishal' were apprehended with the motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-59C-7965. Name of the petitioner has been involved in the present case only on the basis of disclosure statement and except of the said disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. 3.

Counsel for the petitioner also submits that since stolen motorcycle has already been recovered, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not serve any meaningful purpose. Moreover, petitioner is not having any criminal background, as he is not involved in any other criminal activity. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter.

6.

Adjourned to 02.09.2025.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating

Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim 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.).

8.

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. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE June 23, 2025 Lavisha"

4.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 23.06.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order. 5.

Learned State counsel on instructions confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 26.06.2025 by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 6.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 23.06.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 02.09.2025 NainaRajput Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO