[304] Nirdosh Kumar State of Haryana Coram : Present: SANJAY VASHISTH 1. 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the pe during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder: Name of Petitioner(s) Nirdosh Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-46961 Date of Decision : 02.09.2025 Nirdosh Kumar versus State of Haryana HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Rajesh Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. KanwarSanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the pe during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder: Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) 0191 09.09.2024 34, 406 of IPC, 1860 (later on added Section 3 of H ryana Prote tion of Interest of De Financial E tablishment Act, 2013 and Section 21(1)(2)(3) of Banning of U regulated Dep sit Scheme Act, 2019). HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 46961-2025 Date of Decision : 02.09.2025 …Petitioner ….Respondent SANJAY VASHISTH Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. KanwarSanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Section(s) Police Station District 34, 406 and 420 of IPC, 1860 (later on added Section 3 of Ha- ryana Protec- tion of Interest epositors in nancial Es- lishment Act, 2013 and tion 21(1)(2)(3) of Banning of Un- regulated Depo- sit Scheme Act, 2019). City Safidon Jind The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, titioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising District RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.09.03 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46961-2025 -2- 2. While referring to the compromise dated 11.09.2024 (Annexure P-3), counsel submits that the amount in question has already been received by the complainant Naveen and other interested persons/victims and thereon the proceedings in the FIR qua the co-accused/main accused-RinkuDhanda and Sonia Dhanda and Manpreet Singh have already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 21.10.2024 in CRM-M-46717-2024 (Annexure P-9). He further submits that the petitioner has no control over the management of the company that received the amount, and being merely an employee, is facing prosecution and has been in jail since 07.02.2025. After completion of the investigation, the challan was submitted on 03.04.2025, and the process of recording statements is yet to begin. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the complainant is unable to dispute the factual submissions addressed by the counsel for the petitioner. The investigation in the case is complete, and the challan has been submitted before the concerned Court. Apart from the complainant- Naveen, there are other victims as well who have allegedly been duped by the petitioner and her co-accused. Upon this counsel refers to the compromise dated 11.09.2024(Annexure P-3), wherein names of the other victims have also been mentioned, who have entered into the agreement and the FIR has al- ready been quashed. He further submitted that co-accused Anjali and Ashok Kumar Munna have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court. RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.09.03 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46961-2025 -3- 4. Learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner is stated to be involved in four other cases. 5. I have considered the submissions addressed by the respective counsel for the parties and gone through the petition. 6. Considering the totality of circumstances, the facts and allega- tions leveled against the petitioner, and the fact that she has already under- gone a period of 07 months in jail, and cannot be kept behind bars indefinite- ly, I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is al- lowed.Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 7. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 8. Any of the discussion done and recorded hereabove, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in ac- cordance with law. 9. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. CRM-M-46961-2025 -4- RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.09.03 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 02.09.2025 ‘R. Sharma' Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.09.03 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document