CRM M-11405 of 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-11405 of 2025 Date of Decision: 12.05.2025 Sanjeev Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present : Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate and Mr. Vikas Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. N.S.SHEKHAWAT , J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. with a prayer to grant concession of regular bail to him in case FIR No.359 dated 19.09.2023 registered under Sections 406, 420 and 506 of IPC at Police Station Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that from the bare reading of the allegations levelled in the FIR (Annexure P-1), it AMIT RANA 2025.05.16 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order CRM M-11405 of 2025 -2- is clear that a civil dispute has been converted into a criminal offence illegally. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 02.02.2024 and is in custody for the last about 01 year and 02 months. The challan has already been presented against him and all the offences in the present case are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Ranjeev Kumar, who was on same footing, has already been granted the concession of bail by this Court. Thus, the petitioner may also be ordered to be released on bail. 3. A short reply by way of an affidavit of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State and the same is taken on record. Learned State counsel assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner and his co-accused had agreed to sell their land vide agreement to sell dated 04.06.2021 and received an amount of Rs.2.70 crores from the complainant by cheating and defrauding the complainant, on the false promise of executing the sale deed in his favour and sufficient evidence had been collected against him. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In the present case, it is not in dispute that almost similarly placed co-accused Rajeev has been granted the concession AMIT RANA 2025.05.16 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order CRM M-11405 of 2025 -3- of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-2). The petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2024 and all the offences are triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class. Even, only 12 witnesses out of 22 witnesses have been examined so far and the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time. 6. In view of the above, without commenting any further on the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned. 12.05.2025 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) amit rana JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No AMIT RANA 2025.05.16 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order