Court says accused misused liberty after release, sent abusive messages and fresh threats to complainant’s family, violating key bail condition
Chandigarh, Sept. 22, 2026: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has cancelled the regular bail granted to an accused in a murder case after finding that he had misused his liberty by threatening the complainant and his family members through Instagram, Facebook and in person.
Justice Vikram Aggarwal allowed a petition filed by the complainant under Section 483(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused in FIR No. 222 dated 24.06.2023 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Kaithal. The case involved offences under Sections 302, 323, 341 and 427 of the IPC, provisions of the SC/ST Act, and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
According to the court record, the accused had earlier been granted regular bail on 28.01.2026. However, soon after his release, he allegedly began sending threatening and defamatory messages to the complainant and his family members from his social media accounts. The complainant also alleged that the accused threatened him in person and warned that if he testified in court, objectionable photographs of his sister would be uploaded online.
The complainant then lodged a fresh complaint, leading to registration of FIR No. 72 dated 17.03.2026 under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The accused was arrested in that case and remained in custody.
The High Court noted that the bail order itself had imposed a clear condition that the accused must not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing facts to the court or any authority. The court held that the accused had violated this “most essential condition” of bail.
Referring to Supreme Court precedents including Aslam Babalal Desai v. State of Maharashtra and Ms. P. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the court reiterated that while cancellation of bail is a drastic step and should not be lightly ordered, it becomes necessary where the accused misuses liberty, threatens witnesses, or engages in conduct that makes a fair trial impossible.
After examining the messages, the fresh FIR, and the conduct of the accused, the court concluded that allowing him to remain on bail could lead to an untoward incident. The court therefore cancelled the bail granted earlier and directed the respondent authorities to take necessary steps in compliance with the order.
Bottom Line :
Bail cancellation - Accused, after being granted regular bail in murder case, threatened complainant and his family members through social media and in person, leading to registration of fresh FIR - Such conduct amounted to misuse of liberty and violation of essential bail condition not to threaten witnesses - Bail liable to be cancelled.
Statutory provision(s): Section 483(2), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Sections 302, 323, 341, 427 IPC, Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v), Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 27, Arms Act, 1959, Sections 127(2), 230(1), 351(2), 75(2), 78, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Sourabh Narula v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2984514
