Mulkh Raj @ Mulkh Raj Sharma vs State Of Haryana & Anr.

“…Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this is the second petition filed by the petitioner praying for the grant of anticipatory bail. He has submitted that the earlier petition filed by the petitioner bearing CRM-M-61527-2025 was allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 03.11.2025. He has further submitted that in the earlier petition, the crucial facts of the case regarding the parcel having been misplaced during the transition and the weight of the parcel varying from one place to another could not be brought to the notice of this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner is a retired Govt. employee with clear antecedents. He has submitted that even antecedents of the person, to whom it was being sent for finally sending the parcel to the son of the petitioner, who is in Ethiopia (Africa) are clean. He has submitted that the petitioner booked the parcel on 12.08.2025, however, one month thereafter, on 13.09.2025, he received an e-mail from the courier company saying that the parcel booked by him has gone missing. He has submitted that it is thereafter on 24.09.2025, the present FIR has been lodged. He has submitted that the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the parcel was lost and the initial weight of the parcel varied, when it was went to another place, itself shows that the parcel was tampered during the transition for which the petitioner cannot be held responsible. He has submitted that the present second petition is maintainable keeping in view the fundamental right of life and liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, no prima facie case as alleged against the petitioner is made out and thus, he deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS:-

(i)

That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so.

(ii)

That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

(iii)

That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.

To come up on 03.12.2025.

State is directed to ensure the presence of concerned responsible officer, i.e. Executive Officer, Vigilance Security Officer of DTDC Express, Plot No.392, Phase -1, Industrial Area, Panchkula before this Court on the next date of hearing.