Dismissed¶22

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2025CRM-M/4244/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, CRM-M-4244-2025, decided 01.05.2025 by Anoop Chitkara, J. Anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS sought in FIR No. 367 dated 12.10.2021, P.S. Asauda, Distt. Jhajjar (Ss. 302, 34, 120-B IPC; 25/27 Arms Act); dismissed for concealment of criminal antecedents - status report dated 07.04.2025 revealed FIR No. 29 dated 20.10.2020, P.S. Julana, Distt. Jind (Ss. 302, 285, 506, 120B, 216, 34 IPC; 25/54/59 Arms Act), petitioner arrested 03.02.2022 and bail jumper since 28.08.2023; liberty to file fresh petition with full disclosure.

What did the court decide?

No anticipatory bail granted; petitioner at liberty to file a fresh petition after disclosing all criminal antecedents, including convictions and the cases in the status report, excluding cases where cancellation reports were filed and he was discharged or acquitted.

Sachin Vs State of Haryana — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in FIR No. 367 dated 12.10.2021 of P.S. Asauda, District Jhajjar (Sections 302, 34, 120-B IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act), is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS. +1 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The Court rejected counsel's submission that the petitioner was not aware of FIR No. 29, holding the argument contrary to the status report which records that the petitioner is a bail jumper since 28.08.2023.

¶21

Key takeaways

The present petition is dismissed for concealment of criminal antecedents.ratio¶22
The petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh petition after disclosing all criminal antecedents, including the cases in which he has been convicted and the cases mentioned in the status report.ratio¶22
Clarification: in the fresh petition there is no need to mention those cases in which cancellation reports have been filed and the petitioner is discharged or acquitted.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - S. 482 BNSS - dismissal for concealment of criminal antecedents. Petitioner, apprehending arrest in FIR No. 367 dated 12.10.2021, P.S. Asauda, District Jhajjar (Ss. 302, 34, 120-B IPC and 25/27 Arms Act), claimed in para 31 of the petition that he had no criminal antecedents. The status report dated 07.04.2025 (para 24(a)) disclosed FIR No. 29 dated 20.10.2020, P.S. Julana, District Jind (Ss. 302, 285, 506, 120B, 216, 34 IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act), a murder case in which the petitioner Sachin@Chinu was implicated through the disclosure statement of accused Dashrath, arrested on 03.02.2022, and has been absent/bail jumper since 28.08.2023. Counsel's plea of ignorance of that FIR was rejected as contrary to the record. Petition dismissed for concealment of criminal antecedents, with liberty to file a fresh petition disclosing all antecedents; cases in which cancellation reports were filed and the petitioner was discharged or acquitted need not be mentioned. (Anoop Chitkara, J., 01.05.2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

213 CRM-M-4244-2025 Date of Decision: 01.05.2025

¶3

Sachin ......... Pe��oner Versus State of Haryana ......... Respondent

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶5

Present Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶6

Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

¶7

¶8

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

¶9

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta�on	Sec�ons
367	12.10.2021	Asauda, District Jhajjar	302, 34, 120-B IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act

¶10

The pe��oner apprehending the arrest in the FIR cap�oned above, has come

¶11

up before this Court under Sec�on 482 BNSS seeking an�cipatory bail.

¶12

In para 31 of the bail pe��on, the pe�toner claims that he has no criminal

¶13

antecedents, which reads as follows:

¶14

“31.That as per the informa�on provided by the pe��oner he is neither a proclaimed offender or proclaimed person. That the pe��oner is not involved in any other case or FIR. This informa�on can also be verified from the learned State counsel before deciding the present pe��on.”

¶15

However, State counsel has referred para 24(a) of the status report dated

¶16

07.04.2025, which reads as follows:

¶17

“24 (a) FIR No. 29 dated 20.10.2020 under Sec�ons 302, 285, 506, 120B, 216, 34 of IPC & 25/54/59 of Arms Act, P.S. Julana District Jind registered on the complaint of Sandeep s/o Ishwer Singh R/O Pillukhera Jind regarding murder of Virender s/o Jagdish R/O Pillukhera jind. In this case there are 07 accused named Sahil Rohit, Dharambir,

¶18

JYOTI 2025.05.02 13:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶19

-2-

¶20

Chhotaram, Krishan Dasrath and Sicin@chinu. Complainant Sachin@chinu name came in the disclosure statement of accused Dashrath on dated 26.08.21 when he stated that his friend Sachin @ chinu R/O Bahrana Jhajjar provided him shelter and money for two and half month at his residence in Bahadurgarh Jhajjar. Pe��oner Sachin @chinu arrested in this case on dated 03.02.2022 and admi�ed in his disclosure statement that he provided shelter and money to accused Dasrath even a�er knowing that he is involved in a heinous crime .It is per�nent to men�on here that pe��oner/accused Sachin@chinu is absent /Bail jumper since 28.08.2023 in this case. Next date of hearing in this case is 07.04.25.”

¶21

On this, counsel for the pe��oner submits that he was not aware of the aforesaid FIR. However, this argument is contrary whereas it is men�oned in the status report that the pe��oner is a bail jumper since 28.08.2023.

¶22

Given above, the present pe��on is dismissed for concealment of criminal antecedents. Pe��oner shall be at liberty to file fresh pe��on a�er disclosing all criminal antecedents including the cases, in which pe��oner has been convicted and the cases as men�oned in the status report. It is clarified that there shall be no need to men�on those cases in which cancella�on report have been filed and pe��oner is discharged or acqui�ed. All pending miscellaneous applica�ons, if any, stand disposed of.

¶23

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶24

01.05.2025

¶25

Jyo�-II

¶26

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶27

JYOTI 2025.05.02 13:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen @ Kalu Vs State of Haryana

Rajnish Jain Vs Arihant Jain and Anr.

Achhra Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Manish Vs State of Haryana

Sonia Vs State of Punjab

Suraj Alias Vishu Vs State of Haryana