NISHANT YADAV v. STATE OF HARYANA
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2025-08-13. NISHANT YADAV v. STATE OF HARYANA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101 CRM-M-22280-2022 (O&M) Decided on:- 13. 08. 2025 Nishant Yadav .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present:- Mr. Atul Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Ravi Yadav, Advocate for respondent No. 2. * * * * * AMARJOT BHATTI, J. (Oral) CRM-31592-2025 and CRM-31753-2025 These are the applications filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for placing on record affidavits of Jyoti Yadav and Nishant Yadav as Annexures R-8 and P-8 respectively. For the reasons enumerated in applications, same are allowed. Accompanying documents Annexures R-8 and P-8 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Main case 1. Petitioner Nishant Yadav has filed petition under Section 438 Cr. P. C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 123 dated 18. 04.
2022 under Section 313, 323, 354, 380, 406, 498A, 506, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sector 50, Gurugram (Annexure P-1). 2. As per the facts narrated in FIR, Dr. Jyoti Yadav filed written complaint against her husband and members of in-laws family on account of harassment, beatings and physical and mental torture suffered by her in the hands of her husband and in-laws family. She got married with Nishant Yadav on 29. 06. 2020. Her parents had spent Rs. 60 lacs on marriage. Even then they were unhappy with dowry articles. She had also suffered miscarriage. She has narrated various incidents which took place in matrimonial home when her husband had left her alone in matrimonial home and did not return back. On the basis of complaint filed by complainant, present FIR was registered. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner referred to the order dated 19. 12. 2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench vide which he was granted interim bail.
He has already joined investigation and dowry articles were also recovered. At present matter has been compromised. Both Dr. Jyoti Yadav and Nishant Yadav have filed their respective affidavits i. e. Annexures R-8 and P-8 respectively vide which they have already resolved all their disputes. Petitioner is still ready to abide by terms and conditions of bail order. 4. Compromise arrived at between the parties is confirmed by learned counsel representing respondent No. 2 and not objected to the confirmation of interim bail granted in favour of petitioner. 5. Status report is already on record. Learned counsel representing State confirmed that petitioner has joined investigation and dowry articles were also recovered. Therefore, he is not required for any other purpose. 6. Considering the aforesaid factual position, anticipatory bail petition filed by petitioner is allowed and interim bail already granted in his favour vide order dated 19. 12.
2024 is confirmed, subject to the same terms and conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) of Cr. P. C. 7. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. 13. 08. 2025 (AMARJOT BHATTI) lalit JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.