Anand Vs State of Haryana

Petitioner seeks regular bail in case arising out of FIR No. 0462 dated 10.12.2025 under Sections 61, 318(4), 275, 274 and 125 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, Police Station City Gohana, District Sonipat. This is the first petition for regular bail.

¶16

As per FIR, registered on the basis of secret information received on 10.12.2025, a barricade was laid near Mahadev Resort, Gohana, in the presence of Badal Kaushik, Assistant Manager, Quality Control, the Hisar Jind Milk Producers Co-operative Federation, Vita Milk Plant Jind. A vehicle Ertica car bearing No. HR22S-7104 was intercepted and Sunil of Pritam Singh was apprehended. Upon checking of the vehicle, 35 boxes were recovered containing 450 litres of Vita Ghee, which was later on found to be adulterated as per report of the food analyst.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner Anand

¶18

was not named in the FIR nor any recovery was effected from his AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.07 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

2

¶20

CRM-M-18272-2026 (O&M)

¶21

possession. He was nominated as an accused on the basis of second disclosure statement of co-accused Nand Kishore, who too was not named in the FIR and was implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of main accused Sunil son of Pritam Singh. Petitioner was falsely implicated in the case due to pendency of a similar case against him in the Courts at Delhi. Investigation of the case was complete. Challan had since been presented. Petitioner was in custody w.e.f. 09.01.2026. Learned counsel further submits that the police picked up the petitioner from his house and took him to the police station, where his family members were forced to pay up Rs. 14,00,000/- as illegal gratification to the investigating officer, regarding which FIR No. 03 dated 10.01.2026 under Sections 127(2), 201, 212(a), 217, 233, 3(5), 61, 7A, 7, Police Station City Gohana was registered. Petitioner, thus, deserved to be enlarged on regular.

¶22

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for regular bail submitting that petitioner was active participant in the organized manufacture and distribution of adulterated ghee. He had a key role in preparation of adulterated ghee, by mixing chemical with refined oil and other substances. He with co-accused was running a factory in a premises, rented by its owner namely Reena to him; Nand Kishore and Joginder. Further, there were numerous calls exchanged by petitioner with co-accused. Considering the serious nature of allegations, petitioner did not deserve the concession of bail.

¶23

Petitioner has been involved in the case on the basis of confession statement of co-accused. Although, the issue regarding admissibility of the confessional statement would be considered by learned

¶24

trial Court at the final stage of trial, it is an admitted fact that no recovery AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.07 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

3

¶26

CRM-M-18272-2026 (O&M)

¶27

has been effected from possession of petitioner and the ghee alleged to be adulterated has recovered from the co-accused Sunil. Petitioner is in custody since 09.01.2026. Trial which is still at nascent stage, is likely to take long to conclude. Pendency of one other case cannot be used to deny bail to the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, but without a comment on merits, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

¶28

Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly.

¶29

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE

¶30

06.07.2026 Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶31

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.07 19:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Anand v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand 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

Girraj Gupta Vs M/S Ashok Kumar and Brothers

Javed and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Jai Parkash Vs State of Haryana

Joginder Vs State of Haryana

Jasvir Singh @ Sheer Singh @ Jasbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sahil Negi Vs State of Punjab