Yahya v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Dec 2025CRM-M/55808/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Yahya v. State of Haryana, CRM-M-55808-2025 (O&M), Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, Aman Chaudhary, J., decided 18.12.2025 — anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 made absolute in FIR No.81 dated 01.08.2025 (Sections 3, 13(1)/13(3), 8, Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015, P.S. Akera, District Nuh); conditions under Section 482(2) BNSS; custody not required as petitioner had joined investigation; cancellation clause for non-cooperation with investigating agency.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner Yahya; interim bail order dated 01.10.2025 made absolute subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023, with liberty to the State to seek cancellation if he fails to join and cooperate with the investigating agency. ¶¶23

Yahya Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

283 CR M -M-55808-2025 (O & M) Date of decision: 18.12.2025

¶3

YAHYA ....Petitioner Versus

¶4

STATE OF HARYANA

¶5

...Respondent

¶6

CORAM: H ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMA N CHAUDHARY

¶7

Present : None.

¶8

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

¶9

In view of the request letter c irculated by Bar Association,

¶10

the lawyers are abstaining from work.

¶11

On 01.10.2025, this Court had passed the following order:-

¶12

“The petitioner seeks g r ant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 202 3 in case bearing FIR No.81 dated 01.08.2025 registered under Sections 3, 13(1)/13(3), 8 of Haryana Gauvansh Sa n rakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 at Police Station A kera, District Nuh.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations of the petition e r having fled away in the presence of the police pa r ty cannot be accepted. The recovery already stands effe c ted and as such the custodial interrogation of the petitione r is not required. Notice of motion for 04.12.2025.

¶14

Mr. Viney Phogat, DA G , Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-Stat e .

¶15

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to appear before the SHO/Investigatin g Officer to join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bon d s to the satisfaction of SHO/Investigating Agency subject to the following conditions as envisaged und e r Section 482(2) BNSS:-

¶16

i) that the pe t itioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required; ii) that the pet i tioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any p e rson acquainted with the facts of the case so as t o dissuade him/her from

¶17

PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.12.18 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶18

CRM-M-55808-2025 -2-

¶19

disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the country, without prior permission of the Court and shall surrender his/her/their passport, if any.

¶20

Meanwhile, the State counsel is directed to file an affidavit as to the exact role of the petitioner along with the details of pending FIRs, if any, on or before the next date of hearing.”

¶21

ASI Jagat Singh, Investigating Officer appears and states that

¶22

the petitioner has joined the investigation and cooperating with the same. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation.

¶23

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and the order dated 01.10.2025 granting interim bail to him, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

¶24

5. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join

¶25

and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

¶26

PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.12.18 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Yahya v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yahya 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

Atma Singh Vs State of Haryana

Amarjit Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Lovejit Singh @ Raj Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Harwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Baggu @ Baghi Vs State of Punjab

Mohammad Suleman Vs State of Punjab