Parveen Kumari and Others Vs State of Haryana

Petitioners seek anticipatory bail in FIR No. 35 dated 17.01.2026 under Sections 323, 324, 326, 506, 34 Indian Penal Code, Police Station Kurukshetra University, District Kurukshetra. This is the first petition for anticipatory bail.

¶13

On 10.04.2026, following order was passed:

¶14

“ CRM-16086-2026

¶15

Allowed, as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

Main case

¶17

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner inter alia contends that FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Nasib Singh. He further contends that the incident in question took place on 03.06.2024 but the statement of Nasib Singh was recorded on 05.06.2024. A medico-legal examination of the complainant-injured was carried out which revealed as many as 05 injuries (01 complaint of pain and tenderness)

¶18

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.20 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-20385-2026 (O&M)

¶20

-2-

¶21

suffered by him. After the receipt of X-ray report, the medical opinion was given as under:

¶22

“1. All injuries except injury No.1 are simple in nature. Injury No.2 is grievous in nature.

¶23

2. Possibility of self infliction of all injuries cannot be ruled out.

¶24

3. Possibility of these injuries caused during assault is very less.”

¶25

Referring to the above, learned Senior Counsel contends that there are a total of 04 injuries and a complaint of pain as per the medico legal report and only 01 injury was found to be grievous. The police also did not register the case at the initial instance finding the circumstances to be suspicious, accordingly, a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed before the Illaqa Magistrate for issuance of direction for registering the case and it was thus that the present FIR was registered on 17.01.2026. He further contends that as a matter of fact one FIR No.249 dated 06.06.2024 had also been registered at Police Station Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra under Sections 323, 324, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Sections 115(2), 118, 351of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023] against the complainant Nasib and Wazir Singh on the complaint of petitioner No.1-Parveen Kumari and charges have already been framed on 19.12.2025. He submits that the incident being of June, 2024 and being a case of version and a crossversion wherein, the version of the complainant Nasib Singh

¶26

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.20 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

CRM-M-20385-2026 (O&M)

¶28

-3-

¶29

was not accepted at the first instance and FIR had been registered against him, there would be arguable issues arising as regards the culpability of the petitioners herein. He further submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called for and to extend all cooperation to the Investigating Agency.

¶30

Notice of motion.

¶31

Mr. Onkar Singh Wahla, Sr. DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and prays for some time to seek instructions and file reply, if so advised.

¶32

Mr. Akshay Laller, Advocate enters appearance on behalf of the complainant by filing memo of appearance. He contends that the complainant is an Advocate and that he had been openly attacked by the petitioners herein. The same was aimed towards neck, however, the complainant raised over his hand twice to save himself. He further submits that insofar as petitioner-Vivek is concerned he has criminal antecedents and as a juvenile, a case was registered against him and his anticipatory bail was then dismissed by the Court of Sessions at Kurukshetra. It is thus argued that taking into consideration the criminal antecedents, the interim bail ought not be granted. He further contends that the petitioners herein are influential persons, as members related to them are posted with the higher police officials. He however is not in a position to dispute that FIR No.249 dated 06.06.2024 had already been registered on the basis of statement of petitioner No.1-Parveen Kumari against the

¶33

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.20 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

CRM-M-20385-2026 (O&M)

¶35

-4-

¶36

complainant-Nasib and Wazir i.e. father of the complainant herein. He also does not dispute the medical opinion given by the doctor and contends that the said aspect is to be determined at the stage of trial.

¶37

Adjourned to 20.07.2026.

¶38

Reply, if any, be filed on or before the adjourned date with copy in advance to the learned counsel opposite.

¶39

In the meanwhile, the petitioner are directed to join investigation as and when so required by the Investigating Agency. In the event of the petitioners joining the investigation, they shall be admitted to interim bail by the arresting officer/investigating officer on their furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer. The petitioner(s) shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) of 2023.”

¶40

Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Mahavir Singh submits that petitioners have joined investigation and are no longer required for custodial interrogation. She further submit that cancellation report had been prepared in the case but the same is yet to be filed in the Court.

¶41

Mr. Akshay Laller, Advocate and Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of complainant and filed power of attorney. Same is taken on record.

¶42

Petitioners have joined investigation pursuant to order of this Court dated 10.04.2026 and their further custodial interrogation is not

¶43

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.20 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶44

-5-

¶45

CRM-M-20385-2026 (O&M)

¶46

required. In the circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits, the petition is allowed and order dated dated 10.04.2026, granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioners, is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

¶47

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

¶48

20.07.2026

¶49

Ajay Goswami

¶50

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶51

AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.20 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parveen Kumari and Others v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parveen Kumari and Others 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

Mandeep Kaur Alias Mandeep Kaur Sarao Vs State of Punjab and Another

Harpreet Singh @ Happy Vs State of Punjab

Akhil Alias Chandu Vs State of Punjab

Harpreet Singh @ Happy Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Mukul Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Pawandeep Singh @ Pamma Vs State of Punjab