CRM-M-49715-2026 -1- 138 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-49715-2026 Date of Decision: 03.09.2026 Rajwinder Singh …Petitioner vs. State of Haryana and another …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Parmod Kumar, AAG, Haryana. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) with a prayer to set aside the order dated 19.07.2025 passed by the trial Court, whereby the application filed by the petitioner/complainant seeking release of amount of Rs.4 lakhs in his favour, was ordered to be dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant submits that in the order dated 11.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by this Court in CRM-M-7729- 2025 titled as “Naveen Verma Vs. State of Haryana”, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Naveen Verma, accused had submitted that without prejudice to his rights and just to show his bonafide, he was ready to deposit a sum of Rs.4 lakhs with the trial Court within a period of one week from that day. Naveen Verma, the accused complied with the said order and had deposited a sum of Rs.4 lakhs with the trial Court. 3. Learned counsel further submits that the said amount of Rs.4 lakhs may be ordered to be released to the complainant during the pendency of the trial before the trial Court. He further submits that the trial Court has HEMLATA 2026.09.03 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-49715-2026 -2- misinterpreted the order passed by this Court in CRM-M-7729-2025 titled as “Naveen Verma Vs. State of Haryana” and wrongly declined the prayer made by the petitioner/complainant. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record carefully. 5. From a perusal of the order dated 19.07.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by the trial Court, it is apparent that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. The trial Court has rightly refused to release the amount deposited by the accused before the trial Court. However, at this stage, this Court feels it appropriate to clarify the order dated 01.04.2025 passed by this Court in CRM-M-7729-2025 titled as “Naveen Verma Vs. State of Haryana”, whereby, the interim order dated 11.02.2025 was made absolute by this Court and the accused was granted the concession of anticipatory bail. In fact, while disposing of the main petition, this Court has not mentioned the mode of disbursal of the amount of Rs.4 lakhs to any party. 6. Consequently, the order dated 01.04.2025 is modified to the extent that the amount of Rs.4 lakhs deposited by the accused in CRM-M-7729-2025 titled as “Naveen Verma Vs. State of Haryana”, shall be deposited by the trial Court in fixed deposit in some nationalized bank, fetching maximum rate of interest, subject to outcome of the trial. 7. The present petition stands disposed of with the above terms. 8. Rest of the order passed in CRM-M-7729-2025 titled as “Naveen Verma Vs. State of Haryana” shall remain the same. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 03.09.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.09.03 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document