Gaurav Chaudhary v. State Of Haryana And Another

CRM-M-71866-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-71866-2025 Date of Decision: 24.03.2026 GAURAV CHAUDHARY ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Gurinder Singh, Advocate with Ms. Rishika, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Malvika Singh, DAG,Haryana.

Mr. Gautam Dutt, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yajur, Advocate for respondent No.2.

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/ 438 of Cr.P.C for seeking relief of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 43 dated 11.02.2022 under Sections 387, 406, 420, 506, 34 IPC and 25(1B) (a) Arms Act (Sections 409, 466, 467, 468, 471, 419, 180, 120B IPC were added subsequently) registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Gurugram, Haryana. 2.

Vide order dated 03.02.2026, the arrest of the petitioner was stayed, and thereafter, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties; part payment has already been made to the complainant and proceedings for quashing of the FIR have also been initiated. The petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation. RENU RAWAT 2026.03.24 16.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-71866-2025 -24.

Learned counsel for the complainant has not disputed the aforesaid facts.

5.

I have heard the submissions made be ld. counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

As per report received from the Mediator of Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, the parties have settled their dispute by way of an amicable settlement/ agreement dated 10.03.2026 and the same is taken on record.

7.

Keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and that the learned counsel for the complainant has not disputed the aforesaid fact, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner and is directed to join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer and to abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 8.

However, it is clarified that the investigating authority on addition of an offence or offences may not proceed to arrest the accused/petitioner, but for arresting the accused/petitioner on such addition of offence or offences it needs to obtain an order to arrest the accused/petitioners from the Court which had granted the bail in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumit Vs State of U.P. and Another, Criminal Appeal No. 830 of 2026, decided on 09.02.2026.

24.03.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No RENU RAWAT 2026.03.24 16.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh