CRM-M-34819-2025 -1- 225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34819-2025 Date of Decision:11.07.2025 SURESH KUMAR …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF HARYANA …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rupinder Singh Jhand, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.09 dated 30.03.2025, registered under Sections 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, 308(2) BNS, 2023 (Challan under Section 7, 13(1)(b), Prevention of Corruption Act & 308(2) BNS Act), Police Station ACB Rohtak, District Anti Corruption Bureau Haryana. 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Suresh Kumar and the same has been reproduced below:- “To, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Hisar Division, Hisar, Sir, stated that I Suresh Kumar son of Satbir Singh resident of Rawalwas Rala District Hisar and I am doing farming. My friend Rajesh @ Monu son of Ratan Lal is VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.14 11:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-34819-2025 -2- resident of H.No.240/11 Badwali Dhani, Hisar. Rajesh @ Monu's friend Sanjay is resident of Ludhiana Punjab. Sany has been arrested by Lakhan Majra Police Station in a Ghee Factory case. Yesterday on 29.03.2025, I and my friend Monu along with Sanjay's son Krish went to Lakhan Majra Police Station District Rohtak to meet Sanjay at Lakhan Majra Police Station we met SI Suresh Kumar. I and SI Suresh Kumar were sitting in my car. SI Suresh Kumar demanded Rs.50,000/- from Monu's friend Sanjay, resident of Ludhiana for not beating him in the Police Station and helping in case by not implicating my friend Monu in a false case. On which my deal with SI Suresh Kumar was finalized for Rs.1 lac. On 29.03.2025, I gave Rs.50,000/- to SI Suresh in cash and remaining Rs.50,000/- was paid via G-Pay on 89502-10276 Sunil Kumar's number, Screenshot of the same is with me. Thereafter in the evening we came back to Hisar. Today on 30.03.2025, I received a call from SI Suresh Kumar and he demanded Rs. 1,20,000/- more as bribe. We settled the deal for Rs.1 lac, the recording of the same is with me, which I will present to you later. If I do not give this bribe amount to SI Suresh Kumar, he will implicate my friend Rajesh @ Monu in a false case and will beat up Monu's friend Sanjay in Police Station. I do not want to give this bribe amount of Rs.1 lac to the corrupt police officers. Legal action be taken against them. Sd/-Suresh Kumar complainant son of Satbir Singh resident of Rawalwas District Hisar.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in fact the petitioner was falsely involved in the present case at the instance of the complainant and recovery of Rs.50,000/- was planted on him. He further submits that the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 30.03.2025 and is in custody since then. After completion of investigation, the challan has been presented against him. However, the charge has not been framed against him so VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.14 11:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-34819-2025 -3- far. Learned counsel further contends that there are total 27 witnesses and no witness has been examined so far. Thus, the trial Court will not be able to conclude the trial in near future. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that there are one more complaint against the petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 6. In the present case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last more than 03 months. After completion of investigation, the challan has been presented against him. However, the prosecution is yet to lead evidence against him and there are no chances of early conclusion of trial. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 7. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. 11.07.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.14 11:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order