Amit Gupta v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (211) Date of Decision: 15.12.2025 Amit Gupta ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

Present:

Ms. Garima Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.

**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS'), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No. 459 dated 22.8.2025, under Sections 351(3) and 64(1) of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal.

2.

Vide order dated 20.11.2025, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter:- "This Court while issuing notice of motion on 06.11.2025 had passed the following order:

"Apprehending arrest the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of BNSS for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.459 dated 22.08.2025, under Sections 351(3) and 64(1) of BNS, registered at Police Station Karnal Civil Lines, District Karnal.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR on the statement of the complainant, with the sole motive to harass and extort money from him. It is submitted that the complainant was employed in the house of the petitioner as maid through a broker namely Shyam. There is no evidence on record to corroborate the allegations levelled against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the complainant was medically examined, and no injury was found present on the person of the prosecutrix. The pregnancy of the prosecutrix is also

-2attributable to some other person and not the petitioner. Further, there are material discrepancies in the statements of the complainant, as no allegations were levelled against the petitioner in her statements dated 25.08.2025 and 26.08.2025 recorded under Section 183 BNSS before the learned Magistrate wherein she admitted that there was a dispute only with regard to her salary. However, after a period of two months i.e. on 29.10.2025, the complainant recorded her third statement under Section 183 BNSS before the learned Magistrate, wherein she levelled allegations against the petitioner.

Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and prays for time to file response.

Adjourned to 20.11.2025.

In the meantime, no coercive steps be taken qua the petitioner. Petitioner is directed to implead the complainant as partyrespondent in the present petition." In compliance to the aforesaid order, Status report by way of affidavit of Assistant Superintendent of Police, Karnal, has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State, which is taken on record. Copy thereof has also been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who seeks time to go through the same and address arguments.

Adjourned to 15.12.2025.

In the meantime, the petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023:-

(1) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so.

(2) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts to the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer.

(3) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

Needless to mention that the investigating agency/officer shall continue with the investigation of the case in usual manner. Interim order to continue."

3.

Learned State counsel on instructions from Inspector Kanupriya, submits that in compliance of order dated 20.11.2025, the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for any further investigation.

4.

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. Order dated 20.11.2025 passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute.

-35.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner(s) indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 6.

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner(s).

7.

The accused-petitioner(s) 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 or her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

8.

The accused-petitioner(s) shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

9.

The accused-petitioner(s) shall join the investigation as and when called by the police.

10.

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move to this Court for a direction under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.) to arrest the accused-petitioner(s), in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial. 11.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

(KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE December 15, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No