IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 125 CRM-M-32870-2026 Date of decision: 08.07.2026 Date of uploading:08.07.2026 Girraj ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Anmol Partap Singh Mann, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 08 dated 18.03.2026, registered under Sections 308(2) BNS 2023 (erstwhile Section 384 IPC) and Sections 7, 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Section 13(1) read with Section TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document CRM-M-32870-2026 P a g e | 2 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 added lateron), at Police Station, Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB), Gurugram. 2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out by the petitioner in the present petition) is as follows:- “To, The Inspector, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Gurugram Range, Gurugram. Sir, It is respectfully submitted that I, Mubeena, wife of late Shri Mubarik, resident of Village Umra, Police Station Nagina, District Nuh, am a resident of the aforesaid address. My husband, Mubarik, died at our residence in the village on 16.04.2025 due to a heart attack. I have eleven children, comprising six daughters and five sons. My elder daughters, Ranawar and Sarheen, are married, while the remaining nine children are unmarried. My parental home is situated in Village Chahalka, Police Station Tauru, District Nuh. After the death of my husband, my relatives from my parental family got the requisite documents uploaded on the Government portal through a CSC Centre at Village Chahalka for availing benefits under the Deen Dayal Parivar Suraksha Yojana of the Haryana Government. However, when we did not receive any information for several months, we again submitted all the documents through my son-in-law Harish, son of Dinu, resident of Village Laharwadi, to Tarun, CSC operator of Village Bisru, Punhana, District Nuh. Tarun informed me hat he had uploaded all my documents and that an amount of 2.5 lakh each would soon be credited to my account and to my daughter's account. For this work, he got 11,000/- transferred through phone payment from my elder son--law Warish. A few days later, Tarun informed me that certain objections had been raised in my application documents and that he would visit Panchkula to get those objections removed. Thereafter, he again assured me that the money would soon be credited to my account. That on 12.03.2026, an amount of 2.5 lakh each was credited to my account and to the account of my daughter Arwana maintained with Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Nagina. Since the very same day, CSC operator Tarun and his associate Girraj have been repeatedly visiting my house and pressurising us to pay 1 lakh TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document CRM-M-32870-2026 P a g e | 3 out of the total amount of 5 lakh received in our accounts. They have been insisting that the said amount is to be paid to officials in the Deen Dayal Parivar Suraksha Yojana office at Panchkula through Tarun, who allegedly facilitated the release of the said amount. They have been repeatedly visiting my residence and exerting pressure upon us. Being distressed by their conduct, I narrated the entire incident to my acquaintance Salma, wife of Imran, resident of Village Malab. She came to my house and spoke with Tarun and Girraj, who explained the matter to her and stated that benefits under such schemes are obtained by coordinating with officials in the Panchkula office and that commission has to be paid out of the amount credited to the beneficiaries' accounts. They further stated that pressure was being exerted upon them from Panchkula and that 12% of the sanctioned amount was to be paid to one Sonam at Panchkula and 8% was to be retained by them, making a total commission of 20%. Ultimately, after repeated requests from our side, they stated that since ₹10,000 had already been paid earlier, only ₹80,000 more would be required to be paid. When we told them that the amount had been credited by the Government and that no such payment was justified, Tarun, in our presence, spoke over the phone with a lady from Panchkula on speaker mode. The entire conversation relating to the demand of illegal gratification has been recorded by me, and I shall produce the said recording before you as and when required. I do not wish to pay any bribe to these corrupt persons. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that strict legal action be taken against these persons in accordance with law so that the benefits of Government welfare schemes reach poor beneficiaries in full and without corruption. Any action in this regard shall be a great kindness. Complainant Mubeena, wife of Late Mubarik. Resident of Village Umra, District Nuh. Mobile No. 9050196651.” 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2026. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document CRM-M-32870-2026 P a g e | 4 implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is not a public servant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that, in any case, upon culmination of the investigation, challan stands presented. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man aged 37 years and is the sole bread earner of his family. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further urged that petitioner is a man with clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. State has filed reply by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, SV & Anti Corruption Bureau, Gurugram. Raising submissions in tandem with the said reply, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and thus, he does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 07.07.2026, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 18.03.2026 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 15.05.2026. Total 28 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which none has been examined till date. Even the charges have not yet been framed. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties shall be gone into during the course of the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document CRM-M-32870-2026 P a g e | 5 indicate the likelihood of the petitioners absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. Further, as per custody certificate filed today, the petitioner has undergone 3 months and 18 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case/FIR. Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioners in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent herself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit her passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change her cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document CRM-M-32870-2026 P a g e | 6 State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioners. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 08, 2026 Tarsem Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No TARSEM CHAUDHARY 2026.07.08 17:29 I am approving this document