CRM-M-53153-2024 (O&M) and CRM-M-33305-2025 (O&M) 1 214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 12.08.2025 (i) CRM-M-53153-2024 (O&M) Kandela Nagaiah ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent (ii) CRM-M-33305-2025 (O&M) Vanam Durgaiah ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present: Ms. Kritima Sareen, Advocate for Mr. Pratham Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-53153-2024. Mr. Deepender Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-33305-2025. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Jaiveer Singh, Advocate for the complainant. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. 1. The instant petitions have been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, for grant of relief of regular bail to the petitioners, in case FIR No.612 dated 27.09.2023 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 120-B and 420 of the IPC, 1860 (Sections 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC, 1860, added later on), registered at Police Station Gurgaon Sadar, District Gurugram. SATYAWAN 2025.08.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-53153-2024 (O&M) and CRM-M-33305-2025 (O&M) 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that after the registration of the FIR in question, the petitioner Kandela Nagaiah was arrested on 12.09.2024 while petitioner Vanam Durgaiah was arrested on 18.03.2025. However, the parties have ironed out all their differences and arrived at an amicable settlement; pursuant to their settlement, the parties are in the process of approaching this Court under Section 528 of BNSS for quashing of the FIR in question, on the basis of compromise. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by Mr. Jaiveer Singh, Advocate for the complainant does not dispute the submissions made by the counsel opposite qua the parties having amicably settled their dispute. He also does not oppose the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners for extending the concession of regular bail to them in view of the compromise so effected. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. 5. In the facts and circumstances as enumerated here-in-above, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioners be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/ Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed here-in-above shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 6. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the connected case. 12.08.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Satyawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SATYAWAN 2025.08.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document