Allowed

Rakesh Gupta v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Apr 2026CRM-M/9630/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Chandigarh made an ad-interim anticipatory bail order absolute for the petitioner in a case under sections 108 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, where the petitioner cooperated with the investigation and custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The ad-interim order dated 18.02.2026 making anticipatory bail conditional on cooperation is made absolute.

Rakesh Gupta Vs State of Haryana — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-9630-2026 - 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

201

¶4

CRM-M-9630-2026 Decided on : 09.04.2026

¶5

Rakesh Gupta . . . Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶9

PRESENT: Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anant Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

¶10

Mr. Amish Sharma, AAG, Haryana assisted by PSI Surender.

¶11

Mr. Himmat S. Deol, Advocate and Ms. Sagarika, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶12

¶13

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

¶14

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,

¶15

2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First

¶16

Information Report, as detailed here-under:-

¶17

Name & age of	FIR	Date	Section(s)	Police	District
Petitioner (s)	No.			Station
Rakesh Gupta, aged	350	01.10.2025	108, 3(5) of BNS, 2023	Model	Rewari
about 53 years				Town

¶18

In the present case, on 18.02.2026, following order was passed

¶19

by the Coordinate Bench of this Court:-

¶20

“ Learned Senior Counsel inter alia contends that between the petitioner and Vipin Goyal (since deceased), there was no phone call soon before the alleged incident. The suicide was also not committed at the premises of the petitioner, as was in the case of Prem Narain Gupta, whom the deceased had also contacted after consuming poison. The allegations are of non-return of loan, which was advanced to the petitioner by few

¶21

JAWALA RAM 2026.04.09 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶22

CRM-M-9630-2026

¶23

¶24

other persons allegedly at the asking of the deceased, who have however not made any complaint. There is no allegation levelled which would have made his case fall within the definition of abetment as defined under Section 45 BNS, so as to constitute the offence under Section 108 BNS. He is not involved in any other case; ready and willing to join the investigation as and when required by the investigating agency and will cooperate. Further that, co-accused Usha Gupta has since been granted interim anticipatory bail on 13.01.2026, Annexure P-3.

¶25

Notice of motion.

¶26

At the asking of the Court, Mr. B.S.Saroha, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and Mr. A.P.S.Deol, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Himmat Singh Deol, Advocate, appears on behalf of the complainant and made submissions in opposition.

¶27

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation on or before 26.02.2026. In the event of his arrest, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to compliance of conditions as enshrined under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

¶28

However, it is clarified that if the petitioner does not join and cooperate with the Investigating Agency as required by the Arresting/Investigating Officer, this interim order shall be deemed to have been vacated.

¶29

Adjourned to 19.03.2026”

¶30

Continuing his submissions, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 18.02.2026, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully cooperated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

¶31

Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation by the petitioner on 25.02.2026, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of

¶32

investigation.

¶33

JAWALA RAM 2026.04.09 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶34

CRM-M-9630-2026 - 3 -

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶36

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 18.02.2026, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute .

¶37

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

¶38

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of .

¶39

However, present order would be subject to the submission of passport of the petitioner to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses, within a period of one week from today. Otherwise, he would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

¶40

It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically.

¶41

Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶42

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶43

April 09, 2026 J.Ram

¶44

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

¶45

JAWALA RAM 2026.04.09 19:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Rakesh Gupta v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Gupta v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Singh Vs State of Punjab

Amit Yadav Vs State of Haryana and Another

Joga Singh Vs State of Punjab

Arun Sarin Vs State of Punjab

Manjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Bhupinder Kumar @ Bhinda Vs State of Punjab