Vansh Kumar v. State Of Haryana

REEMA SAINI 2026.07.02 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-34567 of 2026 (O&M) -23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been falsely implicated in the FIR which was registered against unknown persons. No injury was attributed to the petitioner and name of the petitioner had been added lateron. Petitioner was ready and willing to join investigation.

4.

Notice of motion 5.

Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG Haryana, who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail arguing that name of the petitioner figured in the disclosure statement of three co-accused, who had since been arrested. Complainant too had identified the petitioner in CCTV footage. Custodial interrogation of petitioner was necessitated for effecting recoveries and for just and proper investigation.

6.

Allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature. He is alleged to have committed robbery in a liquor shop at midnight and looted cases of liquor along with cash. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessitated and grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would not be fair to the investigating agency and may adversely impact the statutory investigational power of the police. The application for anticipatory bail is, therefore, declined.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 02.07.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No REEMA SAINI 2026.07.02 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh