Gaurav Garg Alias Gaurav v. State Of Haryana

-1CRM-M-22374 of 2025(O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.22374 of 2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.05.2025 Gaurav Garg @ Gaurav ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Mohit Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) This is a petition for regular bail filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in case bearing FIR No.873 dated 17.12.2022 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Kundli, District Sonipat.
  The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was allured for entering into a partnership for investing a large sum of money amounting to about more than Rs.2 Crores.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this is a case of rendition of account(s) as the complainant was a partner with the petitioner and due to outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, the said business faced losses and the complainant started demanding his invested money back. He further states that in the present case, the petitioner was arrested on 17.12.2024 and is in custody since then.

4.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the grant of concession of regular bail by way of filing custody certificate dated 13.05.2025. However, he on instruction from ASI-Rahul, submits that the challan has now Sonia Puri 2025.05.15 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2CRM-M-22374 of 2025(O&M) been presented and charges have been framed.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for a period of 04 months and 20 days, the conclusion of the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and continuous detention of the petitioner pending trial, would not serve the ends of justice. In the present case, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted concession of regular bail in the present case, on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/ Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. 9.

It is however, made clear that in case during his bail, the petitioner indulges in any offence, the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

14th May, 2025 (H.S. GREWAL) Sonia Puri JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Sonia Puri 2025.05.15 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document