High CourtsSingle Bench

Om Parkash vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 24 September 2025 · Citation: (2025) 09 P&H CK 0835

HON’BLE JUDGES
Aaradhna Sawhney, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 406, 420, 506 · Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 — Section 24 · Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482(2) · Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M Of 65491 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 517 words

Aaradhna Sawhney, J

1.

This petition for grant of antticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner in case FIR No. 677 dated 6.7.2023, under Sections 406, 420. 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 24 of Immmigration Act, registered at Pollice Station Karnal Sadar, District Karnal.

2.

On 8.7.2025, while grantinng interim bail to the petitionner, following order was passed:

“This is a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. incase bearing FIR No.677 dated 06.07.2023 under Sections 406, 420, 506 of IPC,1860 and Section 24 of Imigration Act, registered at Police Station Karnal Saddar, District Karnal. The case of the prrosecution is that the petitioner alongwith other co-accused had taken Rs. 36 lakhs fraudulenntly on the pretext of sending his son to Dubai. The petitionner-accused who is resident off the same village as that of the complainant, introduced the complainant to his son-in-law namely Kuldeep and daughter namely Pooja, for sending the son of the complainant to America. The alleged transactionn is stated to have taken place in the bank account of the daughteer of the petitioner.

Learned counsel forr the petitioner states that the petitioner is 75 years of agee and no transaction was madee to the account of the petitioner. He further states that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Adjourned to 18.09.2025.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to appear before the SHO/Investigatingg Officer as and when called uppon to join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail onn his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of SHO/Investtigating Agency, subject to the following conditions as enviisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.]:-

i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

ii) that the petitioner shaall 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/her frrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii) that the petitioner shalll not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;

iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of Section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.”

3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions of ASI Rajesh Kummar, submits thhat the petitioner has joined the investigation.

4.

Keeping in view of the above submissions made by learned State counsel and the fact that the petittioner had joined the investigattion consequennt to the order dated 8.7.2025 passed by this Court, interim bail granted vide order dated 8.7.2025 is hereby confirmed, subject to conditions as envisagged under Section 482(2) BNSS. Further, the petitioner is direccted to join invvestigation as and when required in further by way of written nottice for such purpose to be served by the Inveestigating Officer of this case uppon the petitiooner; he will not tamper with the evidence nor will influence the witnesses and will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

5.

The petition stands allowed.