Judgment · High Court · 2026

Judgment

#1. en filed on behalf of the petitioner Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner en filed on behalf of the petitioner arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, seeking grant of anticipatory/pre

2023 in FIR No.0065 dated 18.04.2026 registered for offences punishable 2023 in FIR No.0065 dated 18.04.2026 registered for offences punishable 2023 in FIR No.0065 dated 18.04.2026 registered for offences punishable 2023 in FIR No.0065 dated 18.04.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 110, 115(2), 3(5), 333, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 at Police under Sections 110, 115(2), 3(5), 333, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 at Police under Sections 110, 115(2), 3(5), 333, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 at Police under Sections 110, 115(2), 3(5), 333, 351(3) of BNS, 2023 at Police on Barauda, District Sonipat. Station Barauda, District Sonipat.

#2. As per the allegations, as set , as set-out in the petition in hand, Praveen stated that on 16.04.2026 he had engaged a complainant namely Praveen stated that on 16.04.2026 he had engaged a Praveen stated that on 16.04.2026 he had engaged a complainant combine machine machine for harvesting his wheat crop. for harvesting his wheat crop. As per the complainant, As per the complainant, at PM, while he was present in his fields, accused Ramesh son of about 10:00 PM, while he was present in his fields, accused Ramesh son of PM, while he was present in his fields, accused Ramesh son of about 10:00 Koop Singh allegedly arrived and objected to the harvesting of the crop of Koop Singh allegedly arrived and objected to the harvesting of the crop Koop Singh allegedly arrived and objected to the harvesting of the crop Koop Singh allegedly arrived and objected to the harvesting of the crop the complainant. A dispute ensued and, thereafter the complainant the complainant returned thereafter, the complainant returned to his house. It has been further alleged t to his house. hat shortly thereafter, accused alleged that shortly thereafter, accused Ramesh, his brother namely Rakesh, and Himanshu Ramesh, his brother (petitioner herein) and Himanshu (petitioner herein) forcibly entered entered the house of the complainant and pushed him into the of the complainant and pushed him into the CRM-M- -29793-2026 2 courtyard. Accused Ramesh allegedly inflicted a blow on the head courtyard. of the Ramesh allegedly inflicted a blow on the head of the complainant with a spade (kassi); accused complainant accused Rakesh allegedly assaulted and also caused injuries on his head whereas complainant with a lathi and also caused injuries on his head whereas and also caused injuries on his head whereas complainant allegedly attacked the complainant on his Himanshu (petitioner herein) allegedly attacked the complainant on his allegedly attacked the complainant on his Himanshu waist and feet with a wooden stick. Furthermore, all the waist and feet with a wooden stick. accused threatened Furthermore, all the accused threatened the complainant with dire consequences before fleeing from the spot. the complainant with dire consequences before fleeing from the spot. the complainant with dire consequences before fleeing from the spot. On se set of allegations, the FIR in question has been registered and these set of allegations, the FIR in question has been registered and se set of allegations, the FIR in question has been registered and se set of allegations, the FIR in question has been registered and investigation ensued. investigation ensued.

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the present Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the present Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the present FIR is a gross abuse of the process of law and has been lodged with mala FIR is a gross abuse of the process of law and has been lodged with FIR is a gross abuse of the process of law and has been lodged with intention only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel has further fide intention only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel has further intention only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel has further intention only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel has further occurrence is a result of a dispute relating to harvesting of iterated that the occurrence is a result of a dispute relating to harvesting of occurrence is a result of a dispute relating to harvesting of iterated that the wheat crop and is a case of version and cross wheat crop and is a case of According to learned version and cross-version. According to learned counsel, the petitioner the petitioner has himself suffered injuries the occurrence and himself suffered injuries in the occurrence and the co-accused also sustained injuries accused also sustained injuries which show both sides were which show that the both sides were further submitted that the petitioner is a involved in the incident. It has been further submitted that the petitioner is a further submitted that the petitioner is a involved in the incident. ear and is also preparing for young student pursuing B.Sc. Ist year and is also preparing for young student pursuing B.Sc. competitive exams. It has been further contended that the competitive exam injury attracting s. It has been further contended that the injury attracting the offence under Section 110 of the BNS has been specifically attrib the offence under Section 110 uted to BNS has been specifically attributed to of the accused Ramesh, who allegedly inflicted a blow on the head of the accused Ramesh, who allegedly inflicted a blow on the head co-accused Ramesh, who allegedly inflicted a blow on the head complainant with a spade (kassi) and is already complainant Learned counsel already in custody. Learned counsel present petitioner has merely been attributed simple has emphasized that the present petitioner has merely been attributed simple present petitioner has merely been attributed simple has emphasized that the feet of the complainant with a wooden stick and injuries on the waist and feet of the complainant with a wooden stick and feet of the complainant with a wooden stick and injuries on the waist and therefore, the offence under Section 110 of therefore, the offence under Section 110 BNS is not attracted against him. of BNS is not attracted against him. Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no need for custodial Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no need for custodial Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no need for custodial Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no need for custodial g remains to be interrogation of the petitioner as nothing incriminating remains to be interrogation of the petitioner as nothing incriminatin interrogation of the petitioner as nothing incriminatin CRM-M- -29793-2026 3 recovered from him. Moreover, there is no likelihood of the petitioner recovered from him. Moreover, there is no likelihood of the petitioner recovered from him. Moreover, there is no likelihood of the petitioner recovered from him. Moreover, there is no likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or tampering with the prosecution absconding from the process of justice or tampering with the prosecution absconding from the process of justice or tampering with the prosecution absconding from the process of justice or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is enlarged on pre- evidence in case he is enlarged on pre arrest bail. On strength of these -arrest bail. On strength of these of anticipatory bail is entreated for. submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for. submissions, the grant

#4. Per contra, learned State counsel as also learned counsel , learned State counsel as also learned counsel opposed the petition in hand by arguing appearing for the complainant, have opposed the petition in hand by arguing opposed the petition in hand by arguing appearing for the complainant, It has been that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. It has been that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. allegations against the petitioner are specific and duly contended that the allegations against the petitioner are specific and duly allegations against the petitioner are specific and duly contended that the supported by the material collected during investigation. Furthermore, supported by the material collected during investigation. supported by the material collected during investigation. petitioner was an active participant in the occurrence and acted in concert petitioner was an active participant in the occurrence and acted in concert petitioner was an active participant in the occurrence and acted in concert petitioner was an active participant in the occurrence and acted in concert with the co-accused in furtherance of their common intention. with the co According to erance of their common intention. According to petitioner is alleged to have inflicted injuries on learned State counsel, the petitioner is alleged to have inflicted injuries on petitioner is alleged to have inflicted injuries on learned State counsel, the the hands, legs and waist of the complainant with a wooden stick (lathi). It the hands, legs and waist of the complainant with a wooden stick (lathi). the hands, legs and waist of the complainant with a wooden stick (lathi). the hands, legs and waist of the complainant with a wooden stick (lathi). has been further contended that the investigation is has been further contended that the still at a crucial stage investigation is still at a crucial stage he weapon and several material aspects remain to be verified. Moreover, the weapon and several material aspects remain to be verified. and several material aspects remain to be verified. allegedly used by the present petitioner is yet to be recovered and his allegedly used by the present petitioner is yet to be recovered and his allegedly used by the present petitioner is yet to be recovered and his allegedly used by the present petitioner is yet to be recovered and his custodial interrogation is necessary for effecting recovery and unearthing custodial interrogation is necessary for effecting recovery and unearthing custodial interrogation is necessary for effecting recovery and unearthing custodial interrogation is necessary for effecting recovery and unearthing Considering the nature of allegations, the custodial the complete facts. Considering the nature of allegations, the custodial Considering the nature of allegations, the custodial the complet Accordingly, a prayer has been interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Accordingly, a prayer has been interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. instant petition. made for the dismissal of the instant petition. made for the

#5. and have I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have I have heard the learned counsel for the gone through the available record of the case. gone through the available record of the case. gone through the available record of the case.

#6. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by the It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by the It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by the Sumitha Pradeep vs. Arun Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as Sumitha Pradeep vs. Arun Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled as relevant whereof Kumar C.K. and another, 2022(4) RCR (Criminal) 977, relevant whereof Kumar C.K. and another, 2022(4) RCR (Criminal) 977, Kumar C.K. and another, 2022(4) RCR (Criminal) 977, ads as under: reads as under: CRM-M- -29793-2026 4 “12. In a case containing such serious allegations, the High Court In a case containing such serious allegations, the High Court In a case containing such serious allegations, the High Court ought not to have exercised its jurisdiction in granting protection against ought not to have exercised its jurisdiction in granting protection against ought not to have exercised its jurisdiction in granting protection against hand to take the arrest, as the Investigating Officer deserves freehand to take the arrest, as the Investigating Officer deserves free conclusion. It goes without saying that investigation to its logical conclusion. It goes without saying that conclusion. It goes without saying that appearance before the Investigating Officer who, has been prevented appearance before the Investigating Officer who, has been prevented appearance before the Investigating Officer who, has been prevented from subjecting Respondent No.1 to custodial interrogation, can hardly from subjecting Respondent No.1 to custodial interrogation, can hardly from subjecting Respondent No.1 to custodial interrogation, can hardly be fruitful to find out the prima facie substance in the allegations, which be fruitful to find out the prima facie substance in the allegations, which be fruitful to find out the prima facie substance in the allegations, which are of extreme serious in nature.

#16. In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common required argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is to be a and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to be a and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant along with other grounds while deciding an aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should b does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should b ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the ce should be looked into along accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offen with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial the grounds to decline custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a groun interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a groun to grant anticipatory bail.”

#7. As per the stand of the State , indubitably, serious allegations stand of the State, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations in the present case have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations in the present case have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations in the present case have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations in the present case that a dispute arose between the complainant and the accused reflect that a dispute arose between the complainant and the accused that a dispute arose between the complainant and the accused that a dispute arose between the complainant and the accused regarding harvesting of wheat crop by regarding fter an by a combine harvester. After an altercation in the fields, the complainant returned to his residence. altercation in the fields, the complainant returned to his residence. altercation in the fields, the complainant returned to his residence. altercation in the fields, the complainant returned to his residence. Thereafter, the accused persons, namely Ramesh, Rakesh and the present Thereafter, the accused persons, namely Ramesh, Rakesh and the present Thereafter, the accused persons, namely Ramesh, Rakesh and the present Thereafter, the accused persons, namely Ramesh, Rakesh and the present petitioner, allegedly followed the complainant petitioner, allegedly followed use, trespassed into the complainant to his house, trespassed into his house house; dragged him into the courtyard dragged him into the courtyard & attacked him with a spade CRM-M- -29793-2026 5 (kassi) and wooden sticks. and wooden sticks. In the occurrence the complainant sustained In the occurrence the complainant sustained injuries and the accused persons allegedly extended threats while injuries and the accused persons allegedly extended threats multiple injuries and the accused persons allegedly extended threats fleeing from the spot. The allegations prima facie fleeing from the sp disclose a coordinated prima facie disclose a coordinated attack by the accused acting in furtherance of a common intention. attack by The role accused acting in furtherance of a common intention. The role as he attributed to the present petitioner cannot be said to be insignificant as he attributed to the present petitioner cannot be said to be insignificant attributed to the present petitioner cannot be said to be insignificant inflicted injuries upon the actively participated in the occurrence and inflicted injuries upon the actively participated in the occurrence and has actively participated in the occurrence and complainant with a wooden stick. The fact that the grievous head injury ha complainant with a wooden stick. The fact that the grievous head injury complainant with a wooden stick. The fact that the grievous head injury been attributed to co-accused Ramesh does not been attributed to co dilute the accused Ramesh does not, by itself, dilute the when the allegations indicate that all accused involvement of the petitioner when the allegations indicate that all accused when the allegations indicate that all accused involvement of the acted together in the commission of the offence. The plea of the acted together in the commission of the offence. have acted together in the commission of the offence. version and injuries allegedly suffered by petitioner regarding version/cross-version and injuries allegedly suffered by version and injuries allegedly suffered by petitioner him is a matter which would require appreciation of evidence during him is a matter which would require appreciation of evidence during him is a matter which would require appreciation of evidence during him is a matter which would require appreciation of evidence during investigation and trial. The stand of the inv investigation and trial. estigating agency before this The stand of the investigating agency before this weapon allegedly used by the petitioner is yet to be Court is that the weapon allegedly used by the petitioner is yet to be weapon allegedly used by the petitioner is yet to be Court is that the recovered for which custodial interrogation recovered is necessary for custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for At this stage of consideration of a fair and effective investigation. At this stage of consideration of At this stage of consideration of a fair and effective investigation. anticipatory bail, Court is not required to conduct a detailed patory bail, this Court is not required to conduct a detailed Court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of the evidence or record a conclusive finding regarding the examination of the evidence or record a conclusive finding regarding the examination of the evidence or record a conclusive finding regarding the examination of the evidence or record a conclusive finding regarding the guilt or innocence of the accused. However, the nature of allegations, the guilt or innocence of the accused. However, the nature of allegations, the guilt or innocence of the accused. However, the nature of allegations, the guilt or innocence of the accused. However, the nature of allegations, the the course of role attributed to the accused and the material collected during the course of role attributed to the accused and the materia role attributed to the accused and the materia investigation are the relevant factors while considering the prayer for investigation are relevant factors while considering the prayer for grant anticipatory bail. of anticipatory bail.

#8. No plausible cause has been shown at this stage from which it No plausible cause has been shown at this stage from which it No plausible cause has been shown at this stage from which it into the FIR in can be inferred that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in can be inferred that the petitioner has been falsely impl can be inferred that the petitioner has been falsely impl question. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for . It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding CRM-M- -29793-2026 6 individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to n with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to n with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to n with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie no material on record to hold case is not made out against prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and the petitioner. preliminary The material which has come on record and the preliminary to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. investigation, appears to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. investigation, appear he petitioner, as it Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to t Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to t State v. would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In State v. would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation.