IN THE 138 Paramjeet Singh State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The the Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 420, 467, Police Station Industrial 2. Briefly complaint made bearing Dairy No.368 station from SP Nafe Singh was the complainants Kumar Sharma offered to facilitate Sonu, Ravinder, falsely arranged attire to project fraudulently allured THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-57782 Date of decision: VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the Mr. Paras Talwar, Sr. DAG, Haryana ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant second petition has been Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.43 dated 09.02.2020 467, 468, 471, 120-B, & 506 of the Industrial Area, Bhiwani, District Briefly summarized the facts of the made by three persons, namely Nafe No.368-PG dated 01.02.2020, Office, Bhiwani through post on was added as an accused in the present complainants that one Lt. Col. Jyoti Bhav and Vikas, projected themselves facilitate job for certain public persons Ravinder, Bhal Singh and others. In a arranged a Government vehicle, dress project themselves to be Army personnel allured thirty persons to pay them around PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 57782-2025(O&M) decision: 23.02.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ the petitioner. Haryana. been filed under Section 483 of for grant of regular bail to the 09.02.2020 registered under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at District Bhiwani. the present case are that the Nafe Singh, Ravinder and Sonu was received in the police on 18.02.2020. Later the said present case. It was alleged by Bhav in connivance with Shiv themselves to be working in Army and persons whose names included planned way, these persons of a Colonel and necessary personnel and in this way, they around Rs.1,74,00,000/- with SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.24 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 138 CRM-M-57782-2025(O&M) the false promise of arranging Army jobs to the beneficiaries. At one point of time, few appointment letters had also been prepared fraudulently. Later, when the complainant side persons came to know about the fraud played with them, they started demanding money but it had become apparent that Shiv Prem Kumar Sharma, in further connivance with his wife namely Kiran Jyoti, diverted the gained illegal gratifications from the complainant side persons, to purchase certain properties in Rajasthan. The role of accused Kiran Jyoti is that of managing the finance of these properties in Jaitpura District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan), where one Bebilon Convent School has been built. Allegations of these properties being purchased as "benami" property on false documents have also been levelled. Legal action against above named accused persons was thus sought and it was prayed by the complainants that their embezzled money be kindly be got recovered along with interest. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and that he has been nominated as an accused solely on the disclosure statement of the co-accused. It is alleged that Dr. Shiv Kumar Sharma alongwith Vikas were the principal conspirators and they had contacted the petitioner to get persons appointed in Army, whereupon the petitioner further contacted Nafe Singh. A total of 30 candidates were accordingly allured and a sum of approx. Rs.6,00,000/- each was collected by Nafe Singh for getting them appointed in the Indian Army. It is further contended that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioner, who is in custody since 05.01.2025. It is further contended that notwithstanding the petitioner having undergone an actual SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.24 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 138 CRM-M-57782-2025(O&M) custody of more than a year in a magisterial trial, the charges have yet not been framed. There are 62 witnesses to be examined. The conclusion of trial shall thus take long. He further contends that the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected solely on the ground that the other co-accused i.e. Shiv Kumar and his wife Jyoti, to whom concession of bail had been granted, have absconded. He submits that the mere fact that some accused have chosen to abscond from the proceedings cannot be the basis for indefinitely arraigning the petitioner in custody. 4. Learned State Counsel contends that the petitioner was actually involved in alluring gullible candidates into paying money for getting job. It is however not disputed that the aforesaid collection of money had been undertaken by Nafe Singh i.e. the complainant herein and that the assurance of the job had been given by co-accused Dr. Shiv Kumar Sharma and Vikas. The stage of the trial as well as the period of custody is not disputed. It is further not disputed that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 6. Taking into consideration the period of custody in a magisterial trial, the stage of the proceedings and noticing that there are 62 witnesses and none has been examined so far, hence, the conclusion of trial shall take long, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.24 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 138 CRM-M-57782-2025(O&M) 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 23.02.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.02.24 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document