CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 255 ***** CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 Date of decision : 23.7.2026 Date of uploading : 24.7.2026 Prem Singh @ Prem Saini ………….Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Ms. Pallavi Babbar, Advocate, for Mr. Varun Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Priyanka Sadar, Senior DAG, Haryana --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.252 dated 11.5.2025 under Sections 405, 420 of the IPC (Sections 10 and 24 of Immigration Act added later on vide challan dated 7.5.2026), registered at Police Station Krishana Gate, Thanesar, Kurukshetra. 2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:- ‘Respected Sir, Complaint No. 225-KB dated 18.03.2025, along with the investigation report, is in jail. To, Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra. Subject: Regarding filing a case of fraud and taking legal action against the accused Prem Saini, son of Hari Singh, resident of Govindgarh, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, in the name of sending people abroad. ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 -2- Sir, the request is that the accused Prem Saini, son of Hari Singh, resident of Govindgarh, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, Mobile No. 9996170447, 8396073206, works as a foreign agent. I met the accused at a hotel owned by a person named Goldy, who was an acquaintance of mine. Trusting him, I agreed to send my son to America for a total of 32,00,000, with an initial payment of ₹25,00,000. We then paid the culprit 25,00,000 in cash and through the bank account in the presence of Goldy, Nitish Garg, and Devidayal. From 2022 until now, the culprit has neither returned my son's passport, school certificate, nor any of the payments. He has only delayed till now. I visited his house several times, and each time he continued to give false hope, sometimes saying he would return the money, sometimes saying he would send the boy. But now he has flatly refused, saying, "Do whatever you can; I will neither pay you the money nor give you the documents." Therefore, I request you to take the strictest possible action against the culprit and get our payment and documents back. We would be most grateful. Dated: 18.03.2025 SD/ Sohan Singh. proceeding****.’ 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 9.3.2026. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further urged that the allegations in the FIR pertain to the year 2022, whereas the FIR in question was registered in the year 2025. Learned counsel has further urged that genesis of the FIR is a money dispute which has been given a criminal colour. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man aged 34 years and sole bread earner of his family. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 22.7.2026 in ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 -3- Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 9.3.2026 wherein after investigation was carried out; challan was prepared on 11.5.2026 and subsequently filed. Total 15 prosecution witnesses have been cited but none have been examined till date. It is thus indubitable that culmination of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1 Keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the trial emanating from the FIR in question being a magisterial trail, the petitioner already having suffered incarceration for a period of 4 months and 11 days, challan having been presented and culmination of the trial likely to take time, this Court is inclined to grant the concession of regular bail. 6.2 As per custody certificate dated 22.7.2026, the petitioner is stated to be involved in 2 more FIRs. Indubitably, the antecedents of a person are required to be accounted for while considering a regular bail petition preferred by him. However, this factum cannot be a ground ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 -4- sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted 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 his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/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 himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.39319 of 2026 -5- not change his 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 State/complainant shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 23.7.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.24 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document