Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/22361/2026 of RAHUL Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 7 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 CRM-M-22361-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:07.07.2026 RAHUL ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA .…Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Rahul Jaswal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision:07.07.2026
RAHUL
....Petitioner
V/s
STATE OF HARYANA
.…Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Rahul Jaswal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Vasundhara Dalal Anand, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, Advocate, for the complainant.
***
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, 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. Prayer in the present petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”) is for the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.150, dated 18.03.2026 under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of BNS, 2023 registered at Police Station Samalkha, District Panipat.
2. On 23.04.2026, the following order was passed by a Coordinate Bench:- “Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.150 dated 18.03.2026, registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of BNS, 2023, at Police Station Samalkha, District Panipat.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that even otherwise bare reading of the allegations made in the FIR shows that the dispute is totally of civil nature. He, thus, submits that no prima facie case as alleged against the petitioner MANI KUMAR
is made out. He, thus, submits that the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State.
Adjourned to 07.07.2026.
In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:-
(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so.
(ii) That the petitioner 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the aforesaid order dated 23.04.2026, the petitioner has duly joined investigation.
4. Learned counsel representing the State of Haryana, on instructions, submits that in compliance of the order dated 23.04.2026, the petitioner has duly joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.
5. In view of the fact that petitioner has duly joined investigation and keeping in view the statement given by learned counsel representing the MANI KUMAR
State of Haryana, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 23.04.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to compliance of the provisions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)
JUDGE July 07, 2026 Mani Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No
Whether reportable:
Yes/No MANI KUMAR