The petitioner Ram Chand sought pre-arrest bail before the Himachal Pradesh High Court in connection with FIR No. 71 of 2026 registered at Police Station Amb, District Una, for an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, alleging that he induced the victim into a physical relationship on a false promise of marriage and subsequently refused to marry her. The petitioner claimed the relationship was consensual, that the victim had been involved with another person, and that the complaint was filed out of spite after a confrontation. The State and the victim opposed the bail, citing the heinous nature of the offence, the petitioner's alleged concealment of his iPhone during investigation, and a subsequent threat made to the victim and her sister near Amroh bus station on 07.07.2026 to withdraw the complaint or face exposure of her photographs on social media. The Court, applying Supreme Court precedents on anticipatory bail — including P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019) 9 SCC 24, Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, and Pratibha Manchanda v. State of Haryana (2023) 8 SCC 181 — noted that the power to grant pre-arrest bail is extraordinary and must be exercised sparingly, and found that the allegations indicated the petitioner never genuinely intended to marry the victim. The petition was decided on 06.08.2026, with the Court declining to grant pre-arrest bail on the basis of the gravity of the offence and the risk of witness intimidation.