Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/41500/2026 of DHARMENDER Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 10 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-41500-2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026 DHARMENDER …Petitioner V/S STATE OF HARYANA …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Bharti, AAG,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-41500-2026
Date of Decision: 10.09.2026
DHARMENDER
…Petitioner
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA
…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL
Present: Mr. R.A. Sheoran, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Kshitij Bharti, AAG, Haryana.
****
SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL
J. (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in case vide FIR No.136 dated 12.06.2026, under Sections 115. 190, 191(3), 331(6) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Police Station Dadri Sadar, District Charkhi Dadri. This is the first application for anticipatory bail.
2. On 10.08.2026, following order was passed: “1. ............
2. It is alleged that on 12.06.2026 at about 02:30 A.M. petitioner accompanied by other co-accused entered house of the complainant and caused injuries to the complainant and her husband.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties were close relations and there were land disputes between them on which account, petitioner and co-accused were falsely implicated. Offence under Section 331(6) IPC was alone non-bailable. He further submits that petitioner, who JYOTI
CRM-M-41500-2025
had clean antecedents was willing and ready to join investigation.
4. Reply by way of affidavit of Kaptan Singh, HPS, DSP, Charkhi Dadri has been filed by the respondent-State, which is made part of the record.
5. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioner was named in the FIR and there were specific attribution against him. As many as 10 injuries suffered were by complainant’s husband and 04 by the complainant, although they were simple in nature. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner was required for just and proper investigation of the case.
6. In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating/Arresting Officer and join investigation within one week or as and when required. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating/Arresting Officer shall release the petitioner on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing personal/surety bonds to his/her satisfaction. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
7. Adjourned to 10.09.2026.”
3. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Pawan Kumar submits that petitioners have joined investigation and are no longer required for custodial interrogation. JYOTI
CRM-M-41500-2026
4. Petitioners have joined investigation pursuant to order of this Court dated 10.08.2026 and their further custodial interrogation is not required. In the circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits, the petition is allowed and order dated dated 10.08.2026, granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners, is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
5. Pending CRM(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 10.09.2026
JUDGE
Jyoti-V Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
JYOTI