CRM-M-19179-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 208 CRM-M-19179-2026 (O&M). Date of Decision: 17.04.2026. Santosh Pandey ....Petitioner. VERSUS State of Haryana and another ....Respondents. *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH --- Present: Mr. Rakesh Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Manish Bhoria, Advocate for respondent No.2/complainant. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner-Santosh Pandey, aged 46 years, has filed this petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail in case FIR No.173 dated 23.10.2025 under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 340 and 61 of BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station BPTP, District Faridabad. 2. On the very outset, learned counsel for the complainant submits that an amount of Rs.3,29,00,000/- was transferred into the bank account number of Bank of India, which was in the name of Asrec India Pvt. Ltd. After the registration of the FIR, the said amount has been returned back to the complainant. Therefore, no such grievance is now left for determination. JITENDER 2026.04.17 16:15 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-19179-2026 2 3. Learned State counsel, who puts in appearance, is not much aware about the above said factual position. However, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant submits that entire amount of Rs.3,29,00,000/- has been received by his client and in this regard, an affidavit has also been executed by the complainant. After entering into compromise, a petition (CRM-M-16192-2026) for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise, has been filed, which is now fixed for 12.10.2026. 4. In view of these facts and circumstances and that offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate and as of now the entire amount of Rs.3,29,00,000/- has been paid back to respondent No.2/complainant, no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner inside jail any longer, who is there inside jail since 17.03.2026. Thus, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his 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. 5. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 6. The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. JITENDER 2026.04.17 16:15 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-19179-2026 3 7. 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. 8. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 17.04.2026 jitender Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No JITENDER 2026.04.17 16:15 I attest to the accuracy of this document