Megh Raj Sharma v. State of Haryana
Case Details
CRM-M-27859-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (212-2) CRM-M-27859-2025 Date of Decision: 17.7.2025 Megh Raj Sharma ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent
Legal Reasoning
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. Order dated 20.5.2025 passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. 5. 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. Gurpreet Singh 2025.07.17 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27859-2025 -4- 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
Arguments
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate with Mr. Nitin Sachdeva, 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, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No. 53 dated 16.4.2025, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 509, 323 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Women West Gurugram, District Gurugram. 2. Vide order dated 20.5.2025, the petitioner was directed to join investigation. The said order is reproduced hereinafter:- “Apprehending arrest, the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS, 2023) for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.53 dated 16.04.2025, under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 509, 323 & 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Women, West Gurugram, District Gurugram. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case being the father-in-law of the complainant by leveling vague and generic allegations. The petitioner did not have any interference in the matrimonial life of the complainant, whose marriage with the Gurpreet Singh 2025.07.17 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27859-2025 -2- son of the petitioner was solemnized in the year 2017 and in the 08 years of marriage, no such complaint was moved. Further, the present FIR is the counter-blast to the divorce petition filed by the husband of the complainant. It is also stated that the petitioner’s younger son is suffering from 100% permanent disability in regard to which reference was made to the disability certificate annexed as Annexure P4. Furthermore, the petitioner aged about 64 years is suffering from a serious heart condition. He submits that similarly situated co-accused has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 16.05.2025 passed in CRM-M- 27150-2025. He also submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation and cooperate. Reliance is placed upon the judgment passed in Daya Rani Vs. State of Punjab (CRM-M-36744-2024), Barun Chandra Thakur Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others, 2018(5) RCR (Criminal) 49, Balan Vs. State of Kerala, 2003(4) RCR (Criminal) 733, Ranjit Singh Virk Vs. State of Punjab 1997(3) RCR (Criminal) 207, Mohan Lal and others Vs. Prem Chand and others, 1980 AIR Himachal Pradesh 36 and Onkar Nath Agrawal and others Vs. State, 1976 CriLj 1142, to submit that there is no legal impediment in directly approaching this Hon’ble Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Notice of motion. Served with an advance copy of the petition, Mr. Brijesh Sharma, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent –State and seeks time to file response. It is also pointed out by the learned State counsel that application for anticipatory bail was not moved before the learned trial Court in the instant case and that the petitioner has approached this Court directly to seek the relief. Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed his memo of appearance. The same is taken on record. List on 17.07.2025. To be heard along with CRM-M-27150-2025. Meanwhile, the arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed and he shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023;- Gurpreet Singh 2025.07.17 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27859-2025 -3- 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.” 3. Learned State counsel on instructions from SI Parveen, submits that in compliance of order dated 20.5.2025, the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for any further investigation. 4.
Decision
disposed of. July 17, 2025 Gurpreet Singh (KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : : Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No Gurpreet Singh 2025.07.17 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh