CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 107 CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) Decided on :27.07.2026 Surender Singh . . . Petitioner(s) Versus State of Haryana and another . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) i) Present petition has been filed under Section 480(5) and Section 483(3) of BNSS, for cancellation of bail in case FIR No.190 dated 22.03.2023, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, registered under Sections 420, 120-B IPC(Sections 318(4), 61 of BNS) registered at Police Station Sadar Gurugram, District Gurugram. ii) On the statement of the complainant, Surender Singh (the petitioner herein), the aforementioned FIR came to be registered against respondent No. 2, Neetu Sharma. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the application seeking anticipatory bail filed by respondent No. 2 was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, vide order dated 17.06.2023. iii) Initially, petitioner submitted a complaint dated 06.12.2022, inter alia, alleging as under: “ that Amit son of Vijay Singh introduced him to Neetu Sharma resident of House No. 392-P- Sector 38 Gurugram RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 2 and told that she is purchasing some land in Rewari. The land is comprised in Khasra No.105/3, 105/4, 10555, 1056, 894 and 895. He also ensured that there is no dispute regarding the property and no case is pending. The complainant Surender Singh alongwith his friends Ramesh and Jgajeet went to Rewari to see the aforesaid land. They met Neetu Sharma alongwith Amit. She stated that she will make the complainant a co-sharer in the land to the extent of 20% on payment of Rs.25,00,000/-. He made payment of Rs.25,00,000/- to her in cash in 2-3 installments. On 12.11.2021, Neetu Sharma executed an affidavit in this regard which was attested by Ram Niwas Malik, Advocate. When the complainant contacted Neetu Sharma, she assured that agreement of sale rearding the aforesaid land shall be executed soon and he will be informed aout it. On 20.05.2017, when he inquired about the registration of sale deed from Neetu Sharma, She started abusing him and also threatened to kill him. She also threatned to implicate him in a false rape case.” Accordingly, the aforementioned FIR came to be registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. iv) Upon the filing of CRM-M-31103-2023 seeking anticipatory bail before this Court, notice of motion was issued to the respondents. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant accepted notice on the same day. Thereafter, vide order dated 23.06.2023, the parties were referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, and interim protection was granted to the petitioner during the pendency of the mediation proceedings. RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 3 v) As the mediation proceedings did not culminate in an amicable settlement, the matter was referred back to this Court for adjudication on merits. Subsequently, the petition was disposed of vide order dated 15.04.2024 by allowing the same, subject to the petitioner complying with the terms of the settlement and making payment of the agreed amount within the stipulated period. Relevant extract of the said order reads as under: “2. From the perusal of the FIR, it transpires that the dispute is with regard to the purchase of land and the complainant has made a payment of Rs.25 lacs, to become a co-sharer in the land, which the petitioner intended to purchase. Thereupon, upon non-compliance to the assurance given, the instant FIR has been registered. 3. On the last date of hearing, the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to pay the entire disputed amount ₹ i.e. 25 lacs to the complainant in order to settle the matter once and for all. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that in case the petitioner pays the entire disputed amount within a time bound manner, they do not have any objection in settling the matter with the petitioner. Petitioner-Neetu Sharma is ₹ directed to bring demand draft of 10 lacs drawn in favour of complainant on the next date of hearing. Adjourned to 15.4.2024. Interim order to continue. To be shown in the urgent list. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case.” 4. In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court and in order to show his bonafide, today, the learned RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 4 counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the photocopy of cheques No.051566 and 000024 of Rs.5 lacs and Rs.3 lacs respectively drawn in favour of the complainant with the liberty to the complainant that he may fill up the dates of his own choice in the above cheques and assured this Court that the cheques will be honoured accordingly. Though on the last of date of hearing, the petitioner-Neetu Sharma was directed to bring demand draft of Rs.10 lacs, however, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-Neetu Sharma is not keeping good health and because of this reason, she could not arrange Rs.2 lacs more. However, he further submits that within three months from today, the petitioner would clear the entire amount to the complainant i.e. Rs.17 lacs. The proposal as made by the learned counsel for the petitioner- Neetu Sharma, is duly accepted by the learned counsel for the complainant and he submits that in case full and final payment is made by the petitioner, the complainant has no objection even if the FIR in question is quashed. 5. Learned State counsel on instructions imparted to him by ASI Brij Bhusan, submits that the petitioners have already joined the investigation and they are fully co- operating with the investigation process and they are not required for any further custodial investigation. 6. In view of the specific stand taken by the learned State counsel, the present petitions are allowed and the orders dated 23.6.2023 and 30.6.2023 are, hereby, made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioners shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 5 7. The remaining balance amount shall be deposited with the IO concerned, within three months and thereupon, he shall release the amount in favour of the complainant. 8. It is further made clear that in case the petitioner fails to clear all the outstanding amount within three months from today, the interim order as granted by this Court, shall be deemed to be ipso-facto vacated without any further reference to this Court. 9. Disposed of accordingly.” vi) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite lapse of more than two years, respondent No. 2 has neither paid the agreed amount nor resolved the dispute in any other manner. It is, therefore, contended that respondent No. 2 has violated the conditions on the basis of which the concession or anticipatory bail was granted. Accordingly, it is prayed that the bail granted to respondent No. 2 be cancelled. vii) During the course of addressing arguments, this Court put a query as to whether, in the event of non-compliance with the condition(s) imposed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the earlier anticipatory bail petition filed by respondent No. 2-Nisha Sharma, an appropriate application would be required to be filed in the same petition or whether the present petition would be maintainable. viii) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to move an appropriate application for cancellation of bail on account of non- compliance of conditional order of application for recalling/revival of the earlier order dated 15.04.2024, as the condition(s) in question were imposed in the said proceedings. RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-41001-2026(O&M) 6 ix) Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 27.07.2026 Rashmi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RASHMI 2026.07.28 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document