Dilbag Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: November 06, 2025 Dilbag Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Amish Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1.

This is second 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 FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Dilbag Singh 18.07.2025 3(5), 221, 318(4) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 Azad Nagar, Hisar Hisar 2.

On 27.08.2025, following order was passed:- "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 Dilbag Singh,aged about years 18.07.2025 3(5), 221, 318(4), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 Azad Nagar Hisar

2.

It is contended that there is neither any complaint nor any complainant against the petitioner, who is, in fact, a farmer. On the basis of false allegations allegedly concocted by the police, the petitioner has been implicated in the present case as an accused along with his son 'Shubham', on the pretext that he was indulged in medical practice as a regular practitioner. It is further submitted that the premises where the raid was conducted are purely residential, owned by one 'Poonam', and the petitioner resides on the first floor thereof. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation, if granted protection from arrest. Accordingly, prayer is made for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On advance notice, learned State counsel puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions. And, in case of necessity, to file status report.

5.

Adjourned to 29.10.2025.

6.

Till the next date of hearing, the arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed. However, the aspect regarding their joining of investigation shall be considered after perusal of the status report/reply to be filed by the respondent/State."

3.

Today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 4.

Learned State counsel has filed status report dated 28.10.2025, which is taken on record. Registry to tag the same at appropriate place. On instructions from SI Yash Pal Singh, No. 1399 HSR, learned State counsel submits that present petition can be disposed of at this stage, same being infructuous, because a cancellation report has been prepared. In this regard, learned State counsel has referred to para Nos. 10, 11 and 12 of the status report, which are reproduced as under:- "10. That since the premises in question was found to be rented out to one Pawan and no MTP Kit were recovered from the house in question. No hospital is found to be in existence at the premises in question, rather the Pawan who is holding valid diploma took the house in question on rent to open lab, which was later on not opened by him. That during investigation no concrete evidence came on file against the accused name in the FIR.

11.

That on these circumstances cancellation report was prepared in the present case on 22.10.2025 by the Station House Officer, P.S. Azad Nagar Hisar. 12.

That since the cancellation report is prepared in the present case, hence, the present petition is liable to be dismissed being rendered infructuous."

4.

In view of the fact that cancellation report has already been prepared in the instant case, order dated 27.08.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. However, it is clarified that in case at any subsequent stage, cancellation report is not accepted by the Magistrate, instead of arresting the petitioner, he would be allowed to join the investigation and would be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Trial Court. 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.). In such eventuality, 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, and before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.

5.

This petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE November 06, 2025 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO