228 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25438-2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 ALPIT SAINI ….PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ....RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Prabhjeet Singh Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** SANJIV BERRY, J.(ORAL) Status report dated 22.05.2025 in the form of an affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, has been filed. The same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of complainant and filed power of attorney, which is taken on record. 3. By way of present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR (Annexure P-1) as under: - FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 01 14.01.2025 318 (4) of BNSS, 2023 and 61 of BNS added later on. Cyber, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, Haryana. 4. Arguments heard. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on KANIKA 2025.05.23 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment account of certain misunderstanding. He submits that during the pendency of the petition, with the intervention of respectables, compromise has been effected between the parties vide Annexure P-2 and the settled amount has already been paid to the complainant. The petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2025. Hence, seeks regular bail. 6. Notice of motion. 7. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Amrik Narwal, DAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and not disputed the factual matrix and prayed for dismissal of the petition. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant has categorically stated that he has specific instructions to say that the matter has been compromised inter se parties vide Annexure P-2 and in pursuance thereto, the amount has already been paid to the complainant and as such, the complainant has no objection in grant of bail to the petitioner. 9. After hearing the respective submissions and perusing the record, it transpires that the compromise has been effected between the parties and in pursuance thereto, learned counsel for the complainant, on specific instructions from his client, has no objection if bail is granted to the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2025, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. KANIKA 2025.05.23 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 8. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Judge on Duty concerned, if not required in any other case; undertaking to regularly appear on each and every date; not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court; and not to tamper with evidence of prosecution in any manner. 9. Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 23.05.2025 kanika i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No KANIKA 2025.05.23 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment