[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Himani Sayal vs State Of Punjab on 24 February, 2026
CRM-M-70367-2025
CRM-M-2841-2026 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
114
CRM-M-70367-2025
HIMANI SAYAL
......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR
......Respondent
CRM-M-2841-2026
SURAJ KUMAR
......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
......Respondent
Decided on: 24.02.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Randhir Singh Thind, Advocate, and
Mr. Arpinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate,
for the petitioners (in both the cases).
Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
1. Prayer in these petitions, filed under Section 482 of the
BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail
to the petitioners, who have been booked in a criminal case arising out of
First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
Name of FIR Date Section(s) Police District
Petitioner (s) No. Station
(1) Himani 131 19.08.2025 108 of BNS, 2023 Urban Estate Patiala
Sayal,
(2) Suraj
Kumar
CRM-M-70367-2025
2. On 15.12.2025, following order was passed in CRM-M-
70367-2025:-
"1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section
482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.),
is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who
has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First
Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
Name & age FIR Date Section(s) Police District
of Petitioner No. Station
(s)
Himani 131 19.08.2025 108 of BNS, 2023 Urban Estate Patiala
Sayal, aged
about 20
years
2. On oral request made by counsel for the
petitioner, complainant namely Jaspreet Singh son of
Jaswinder Singh, resident of H.No.296, Street
No.01/A11, Guru Nanak Nagar, Patiala, is hereby
ordered to be impleaded as respondent No.2 in the
present petition.
Let amended memo of parties be filed by
counsel for the petitioner, in the Registry, within a
period of two days from today, without moving any
separate application.
3. As per allegations levelled in the FIR by
the complainant, Jaspreet Singh, it is stated that he has
two brothers and deceased, Dilpreet Singh, was the
youngest among them. Marriage of the petitioner with
the deceased, Dilpreet Singh, was solemnized on
28.05.2025. It is alleged that after marriage, petitioner
used to pick quarrels with the deceased as well as
other family members.
It is further alleged that deceased had
disclosed to the complainant over the telephone that
his wife, Himani Sayal (petitioner herein), along with
her maternal uncle, used to mentally harass him and
he was fed up with such treatment. In this regard, a
panchayat was convened between the parties;
however, the situation allegedly remained unchanged.
About a week thereafter, petitioner left the
matrimonial home and started residing at her parental
house. Despite this, it is alleged that petitioner
continued to harass the deceased over the telephone.
Ultimately, on 16.08.2025, deceased left
his house on his electric scooty stating that he was
going to Reliance Company at Mandi Gobindgarh, but
he did not return. Subsequently, on 19.08.2025, with
CRM-M-70367-2025
the help of divers, the dead body of Dilpreet Singh
was recovered from the Bhakhra Canal at Khanauri,
and his scooty was found on the bridge of the Bhakhra
Canal at Nabha Road, Patiala. Consequently, FIR
came to be registered against the petitioner and her
other family members.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner,
however, submits that the deceased was suffering
from schizophrenia and, due to the said ailment, he
used to experience seizures. He had been undergoing
treatment for several years and was taking medication
from Dr. Suman Goyal, Punjabi Bagh, Patiala. It is
contended that this fact was deliberately concealed
from the petitioner by the family members of the
deceased at the time of marriage.
It is further argued that schizophrenia is
associated with depression and suicidal tendencies,
and therefore, petitioner has been falsely implicated in
the present case for the offence of abetment to suicide.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
draws attention to the pension worksheet of the
deceased's father, which has been placed on record as
Annexure P-3, to support the defence version. It is
also submitted that no suicide note has been recovered
in the present case.
Thus, learned counsel for the petitioner
prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner in the present case.
5. Notice of motion.
6. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan,
Sr. DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the
respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status
report in the matter.
7. Adjourned to 24.02.2026.
8. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to
join the investigation as and when required to do so
by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest,
the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail,
subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction
of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also
abide by all the conditions laid down under Section
482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2)
Cr.P.C.).
9. Besides, it is directed that petitioner
would hand over his passport to the Investigating
Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses.
Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the
fact that he does not possess any passport.
CRM-M-70367-2025
It is also directed that before leaving
country any time during trial, petitioner would seek
prior permission of the Court."
3. On 20.01.2026, following order was passed in CRM-M-
2841-2026:-
"1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section
482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.),
is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who
has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First
Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-
Name & age FIR Date Section(s) Police District
of Petitioner No. Station
(s)
Suraj 131 19.08.2025 108 of BNS, 2023 Urban Estate Patiala
Kumar, aged
about 53
years
2. As per allegations levelled in the FIR by the
complainant, Jaspreet Singh, it is stated that he has
two brothers and deceased, Dilpreet Singh, was the
youngest among them. Marriage of the petitioner with
the deceased, Dilpreet Singh, was solemnized on
28.05.2025. It is alleged that after marriage, petitioner
used to pick quarrels with the deceased as well as
other family members.
It is further alleged that deceased had disclosed
to the complainant over the telephone that his wife,
Himani Sayal along with her maternal uncle, used to
mentally harass him and he was fed up with such
treatment. In this regard, a panchayat was convened
between the parties; however, the situation allegedly
remained unchanged. About a week thereafter,
petitioner left the matrimonial home and started
residing at her parental house. Despite this, it is
alleged that petitioner continued to harass the
deceased over the telephone.
Ultimately, on 16.08.2025, deceased left his
house on his electric scooty stating that he was going
to Reliance Company at Mandi Gobindgarh, but he
did not return. Subsequently, on 19.08.2025, with the
help of divers, the dead body of Dilpreet Singh was
recovered from the Bhakhra Canal at Khanauri, and
his scooty was found on the bridge of the Bhakhra
Canal at Nabha Road, Patiala. Consequently, FIR
came to be registered against the petitioner and her
other family members.
CRM-M-70367-2025
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however,
submits that the deceased was husband of Himani,
who has already been granted concession of interim
anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated
15.12.2025 passed in CRM-M70367-2025. He further
submits that the deceased suffering from
schizophrenia and, due to the said ailment, he used to
experience seizures. He had been undergoing
treatment for several years and was taking medication
from Dr. Suman Goyal, Punjabi Bagh, Patiala. It is
contended that this fact was deliberately concealed
from the petitioner by the family members of the
deceased at the time of marriage. It is further argued
that schizophrenia is associated with depression and
suicidal tendencies, and therefore, petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the present case for the offence
of abetment to suicide.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws
attention to the pension worksheet of the deceased's
father, which has been placed on record as Annexure
P-3, to support the defence version. It is also
submitted that no suicide note has been recovered in
the present case. Thus, learned counsel for the
petitioner prays for grant of concession of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner in the present case.
5. Notice of motion.
6. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr.
DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the
respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status
report in the matter.
7. Adjourned to 24.02.2026.
8. To be heard alongwith CRM-M-70367-2025.
9. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the
investigation as and when required to do so by the
Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the
petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject
to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the
Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by
all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of
BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
10. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand
over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to
Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would
submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not
possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country
any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior
permission of the Court."
CRM-M-70367-2025
4. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the
petitioners contends that in compliance of the order dated 15.12.2025
passed in (CRM-M-70367-2025) and order dated 20.01.2026 (passed in
CRM-M-2841-2026) by this Court, petitioners have joined the
investigation, and have fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for
confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail orders.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed status
reports dated 23.02.2026 (in both the cases) in the Court today and the
same are taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the
appropriate place on the file.
5. Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said
averment made by counsel for the petitioners of joining the investigation
by the petitioners, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of
the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. Since, both the petitioners have already joined the
investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim
bail order dated 15.12.2025 passed in (CRM-M-70367-2025) and order
dated 20.01.2026 (passed in CRM-M-2841-2026), passed by this Court
are hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petitions are allowed.
However, petitioners shall continue to join the investigation
as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.
8. Accordingly, petitions stand disposed of.
CRM-M-70367-2025
9. However, present order would be subject to the submission
of passport of the petitioners to the Investigating Agency or to Court
concerned, if they possesses, within a period of one week from today.
Otherwise, they would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they
doe not possess any passport.
It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied
with, this order would be considered as non est automatically.
10. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other
connected cases.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
24.02.2026
Lavisha
Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
