Lalit Kumar v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 22.08.2025 Lalit Kumar ......Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present:
Mr. Ankur Lal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl.AG, Haryana.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1.
Relief sought The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 482 BNSS seeking pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.0199 dated 04.06.2025 under Sections 120-B,420,467,468,471 IPC registered at P.S Model Town, Rewari, District Rewari.
3.
Contention On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been roped in in order to extract money. No role is attributed to the petitioner, who is working as stamp vendor. That apart, the dispute is civil in nature, which is being given criminal color and that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner.
Notice of motion.
On behalf of the State On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl.AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposes the grant of anticipatory bail stating that the petitioner provided back date stamp papers to the complainant. He seeks custodial interrogation to recover the documents involved in the present FIR.
4.
Analysis Be that as it may, after given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions as made, by the counsel for both the parties, it is found that the instant FIR has been registered by the complainant only to harass the petitioner as the civil dispute is pending between them and State has failed to make out the case against the petitioner as to why his custodial interrogation is required added with the fact that main accused has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-38279-2025. Hence, this Court finds no reason to deny the petitioner the concession of anticipatory bail, wherein the petitioner has bona fide intentions and is willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency within the stipulated time period.
5.
Relief In the light of above, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to him joining investigation with the Investigating Officer concerned within a period of one week from today, on furnishing of personal/surety bonds to his satisfaction for the reason that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required as it would be of no fruitful purpose to put the petitioner behind the bars. The petitioner shall also abide by the terms and
conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, which are reproduced below:- 'When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including- (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.' However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner does not comply with the aforesaid direction of joining the investigation within a period of one week and comply with the aforesaid condition under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023, the order passed by this Court today shall automatically stands cancelled. In the aforesaid terms, the present petition stands allowed. ( SANDEEP MOUDGIL ) JUDGE 22.08.2025 manoj Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No