Anurag vs State Of Haryana

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3665 P&H
Judgement Date : 22 April, 2026

[Cites 14, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Anurag vs State Of Haryana on 22 April, 2026

Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
                           CRM-M-1604-2026                                                                 1

                               210      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                                   CHANDIGARH
                                                                       CRM-M-1604-2026
                                                                   Reserved on: 20.04.2026
                                                                Pronounced on: 22.04.2026
                                                              Date of uploading: 22.04.2026


                           ANURAG                                                     ... PETITIONER
                                                              VERSUS
                           STATE OF HARYANA                                           ...RESPONDENT

                           CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

                           Present:    Mr. Anmol Dutt Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
                                       Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana.
                                       Mr. Rakesh Kumar Lathwal, Advocate for
                                       Mr. Amritpal Singh Maan, Advocate for the complainant.

                                                          ****
                           JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.165 dated 06.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 452, 307 and 506 of IPC (Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC added later on) at Police Station Barara, District Ambala.

2. The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Pooja Devi, which reads as under:-

"Shri Maan Ji, the copy of the application is as follows. To SHO Saheb, Police Station Barara, Shri Maan Ji, I am Pooja Devi, wife of Naveen Sharma, resident of Kambasi and do domestic work. My husband Naveen also does farming. On 05.05.2023 at 08.15 pm, my husband and his friend were KUSUM 2026.04.22 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh CRM-M-1604-2026 2 sowing wheat in the living room. And I went to give them water. When I returned after giving water, Anurag and Aditya s/o Ashok Kumar, accompanied by about 10-12 boys, came out from the old houses near the temple and were threatening me that today we will kill your husband, your children and you too. When I followed them, Anurag and Aditya had axes in their hands and the rest had sticks etc. In front of my eyes, Anurag and Aditya attacked my husband with axes and the rest started hitting him with sticks. When I shouted for help, many people came running and seeing them, all of them ran away shouting and were saying that if any person from the village helped them, he would also face the same fate. Anurag and Aditya conspired with their friends cut my husband's hand and also attacked him on the head with axes. Then I called my mother- in-law, who took my husband and his friend Monu to the hospital in an injured condition. Anurag and Aditya's mother Saroj used to tell me many times in the temple that whenever I get a chance, I will get my boys to kill your entire family. On 05/05/2023, Aditya and Anurag and their mother Saroj, along with other boys, entered the house and made a mistake by cutting my husband's arm and causing other injuries, injuring his friend and threatening us. Action should be taken against them. My husband is currently admitted in PGI Chandigarh for treatment."

SD Pooja Devi KUSUM 2026.04.22 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh CRM-M-1604-2026 3

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He contends that the allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and his brother Aditya, who at that time was in Chennai, which completely falsifies the prosecution case. In fact, Aditya has been found innocent and placed in column No.2. Despite 03 years having elapsed, since the registration of the FIR, the statement of the complainant has not yet been recorded. As the petitioner is in custody since 12.05.2023 but only 01 of the 19 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

3. The learned counsel for the State and counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, contend that while it is true that Aditya has been found to be innocent and placed in column No.2, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (Section 358 BNSS) has been filed to summon Aditya. Merely because the allegations qua one of the accused has been found to be incorrect during police investigation does not mean that the petitioner has not committed the offence in question. The principle of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus has no application in India. The petitioner tried to mislead the investigating agency by claiming to be a juvenile on the basis of a Aadhaar Card and School Leaving Certificate, which were found to be forged and therefore, Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC were added on 07.08.2023. The petitioner has acted in a brutal manner by severing the arm of the KUSUM 2026.04.22 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh CRM-M-1604-2026 4 injured-Naveen Kumar. The nature of the allegations, the brutal manner in which the offence has been committed and the conduct of the petitioner in forging to plead juvenility does not entitle the petitioner to the grant of bail.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. As per the case of the prosecution, the petitioner and his co-accused/Aditya, who happen to be real brothers, are alleged to have brutally assaulted the injured-Naveen Kumar, the husband of the complainant, and the arm of Naveen Kumar has been severed. Merely because Aditya has been found to be innocent does not in any way detract from the brutal role played by the petitioner, who has been found to be prima facie culpable. Even otherwise, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (Section 358 BNSS) to summon Aditya is pending adjudication. The petitioner is a clever individual, who forged and fabricated an Aadhaar Card and his School Leaving Certificate so as to raise the plea of being a juvenile. Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC have been added in the afore-mentioned FIR.

6. Keeping in view the afore-mentioned discussion, I find no merit in the present petition and the same stands dismissed.

7. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.


                                                                                (JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
                                                                                     JUDGE
                           22.04.2026
                           kusum                Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
                                                Whether reportable:-        Yes/No

KUSUM
2026.04.22 20:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC Chandigarh