CRM-M-29516-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 228 CRM-M-29516-2026 Date of Decision: 09.07.2026 VIRENDER @ NARENDER ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C) in case FIR No. 213 dated 12.07.2025 under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of BNS-2023 (Sections 420,34 of IPC, 1860) registered at Police Station Ambala City, District Ambala. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the present FIR was registered on the complaint of Deepak Goyal, who alleged that on 12.07.2025, at about 7:15 A.M., his mother, Smt. Nirmala Goyal, aged about 63 years, had gone to Gurudwara Manji Sahib. While she was returning home, she was intercepted by four unknown persons, two of whom were riding a motorcycle and the other two an Activa scooter. The said persons stopped her and represented that they wanted to examine her gold bangles, while pretending to check the gold ornaments of another person with the aid of a machine. Believing their representation and being frightened, the complainant's mother handed over her gold bangles to them. After examining the bangles, all four persons fled from the spot towards Gurudwara Manji Sahib. Upon reaching home, she narrated the entire incident to the complainant, on the basis of which the present FIR came to be registered. RENU RAWAT 2026.07.09 17.51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-29516-2026 -2- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. He further submits that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and, despite investigation, the police could not trace the actual culprits, whereupon an untraced report was filed. It is contended that the petitioner has subsequently been implicated in the present case without any cogent material. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.03.2026. It is also submitted that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and have effected a compromise. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. He submits that, as per the custody certificate, the petitioner has remained in custody for the last 04 months and 04 days and is involved in several other cases. 6. Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocate appears and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He submits that he has no objection if the bail is granted to the petitioner as the matter has been compromised between the parties. He has produced a photocopy of the compromise deed in the Court today and the same is taken on record. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. After hearing the rival submissions and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the petitioner has remained in RENU RAWAT 2026.07.09 17.51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-29516-2026 -3- custody for the last 04 months and 04 days; matter has been compromised between the parties coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. 9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 10. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. It is clarified that if, while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 09.07.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT 2026.07.09 17.51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh