Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28576 (PNJ)

SURENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/22822/2026 · 2026-07-08

Sanjay Vashisth

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-22822-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 314 CRM-M-22822-2026 Decided on : 08.07.2026 SURENDRA SINGH .....PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ......RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Jitender Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab. None for the complainant. ***** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), seeking grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0031 dated 13.02.2026, under Sections 318(4), 61(2) of BNS Act, 2023 (Corresponding Sections 420, 120-B of IPC Act, 1860), registered at Police Station Jodhewal, District Ludhiana. 2. Dispute in the FIR arises from a transaction involving approximately Rs.7,00,000/- regarding the sale of a plot to a third party rather than the complainant. Vide order dated 14.05.2026, this Court, on realizing that dispute could be resolved amicably, referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the settlement agreement dated 29.05.2026 as executed before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and submits that the dispute has been successfully resolved by recording terms and conditions therein. Settlement agreement is taken on record. Page 1 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2026.07.10 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22822-2026 As per the settlement agreement, the amount of share payable by petitioner to complainant is settled at Rs.3,25,000/-. Counsel further submits that entire settled amount has been paid back to the complainant- Rajesh Kumar, following the execution of the settlement agreement dated 29.05.2026. Thus, prays for grant of anticipatory bail by permitting him to join the investigation. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel is unable to dispute the factual position as arguing by counsel for the petitioner and however, there being no one to represent the complainant. This Court has no other option except to believe the statement of the counsel for the petitioner and thereon to proceed further. Earlier arrest of the petitioner was stayed. 4. However, in view of the facts and circumstances noticed here above, petition is allowed, this Court does not find it necessary to keep the present petition pending any further and, accordingly, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same, with the direction to the petitioner to join the investigation within two weeks from today or as and when called by the investigating officer, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 5. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. Page 2 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2026.07.10 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-22822-2026 6. However, it is made clear that the aforesaid concession shall be deemed to be rendered inoperative, in the event, petitioner fails to join the investigation, within the stipulated time, or fails to comply with the terms and conditions, as may be imposed, in accordance with law. In case any of the contention is found incorrect by the complainant, regarding the payment of settlement of dispute and payment of the amount, it will be open for the complainant to move recalling of this order and restoration of the petition. 7. With the directions recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 08.07.2026 pry Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO Page 3 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2026.07.10 09:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document