CRM-M/28564/2026 of ISHA Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 21 July 2026

1. On 19.5.2026, the following order was passed: ‘1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short - ‘the BNSS’), has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.137 dated 24.04.2026 (Annexure P-1), registered under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short - ‘the BNS’), at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala, Haryana.

2. Allegations qua the petitioner are that she along with co-accused, on account of alleged harassment, maltreatment and abetment, compelled her husband Tarun (now deceased) to commit suicide. It is further alleged that prior to taking extreme step, deceased left behind a suicide note wherein allegations were levelled qua petitioner and co-accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for concession of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner on the following grounds:

i. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, as no offence under Section 108 of the BNS is made out against her;

ii. The true genesis has been suppressed that there was a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the deceased; the petitioner left her matrimonial house 4 years ago and FIR No.297 dated 05.05.2025 (Annexurue P-3) was registered against the deceased, as he was a drug addict and this fact is wholly admitted by him in his suicide note as well as in the FIR (Annexure P-3);

iii. The petitioner is having a minor child of 6 ½ years; and

iv. The petitioner is ready and willing the join the investigation.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the following grounds:

i. That the petitioner along with co-accused, is alleged to have blackmailed the deceased and as per suicide note, they extorted an amount of Rs.7 lakh from him. However, on a query posed by this Court whether there is any document to support the allegations of blackmailing, money transaction from any bank etc. regarding extortion of money, learned State counsel requested an adjournment to file reply.

6. Mr. Inderjeet Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf the complainant – Harish Kumar and has filed memorandum of appearance, which is taken on record. He has opposed the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that one day prior to the incident, the deceased was given beatings and there is a CCTV footage regarding the said incident. Thus, he prayed for dismissal of the present petition.

7. Heard.

8. Taking into consideration the contentions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds merit in the present petition on the following grounds:-

i. Dispute between the petitioner and deceased arose out of a matrimonial discord;

ii. That the petitioner had been residing separately from the deceased for the last 4 years prior to alleged occurrence; iii. That the deceased was suffering from drug addiction; and

iv. Petitioner is having a minor child.

9. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when required by the investigating officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of arresting/investigating officer till the next date of hearing, subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

10. Adjourned to 21.07.2026.

11. Reply be filed on or before the next date of hearing.’

2. Learned State counsel (on instructions) submits that pursuant to the order dated 19.5.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperating therein but she ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail in view of the gravity and seriousness of the allegations against the petitioner.

3. Since the petitioner has joined investigation & cooperating therein, the instant petition is allowed. Interim order dated 19.5.2026, passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.

4. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner 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.

5. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

6. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE 21.7.2026 Ashwanii

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable:

Yes/No