Jeetandar Kumar v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.

Date of Decision: 23.03.2026

...Petitioner

Versus

....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Angel Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Jasmine Gill, AAG, Haryana.

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner was granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 23.01.2026, wherein it was noticed that, as per the prosecution case, the petitioner had entered into several agreements to sell with the complainant without disclosing that civil litigation was already pending in respect of the property in question. It was also recorded that, as per the version of the petitioner, the dispute between the parties is essentially of a civil nature, which has been given the colour of a criminal case by the complainant. Considering the said facts and circumstances, the petitioner was ordered to be released on interim anticipatory bail. 2.

Today, learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation; however, he has not returned the earnest money. It is, however, not disputed that civil litigation between the parties is already pending, and the question as to whether the petitioner is liable to return the ANU 2026.03.24 10:06 I am the author of this document Chandigarh

earnest money or not is a matter to be adjudicated by the competent civil court. Mere non-return of the earnest money, in such circumstances, cannot be made a ground to deny the concession of anticipatory bail, particularly when the petitioner has already joined the investigation and the possession has also been delivered to the other party.

3.

In view of the above, the order dated 23.01.2026 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute. 4.

(MANDEEP PANNU) 23.03.2026 JUDGE Anu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No ANU 2026.03.24 10:06 I am the author of this document Chandigarh