Mohan Singh v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 20.03.2026 MOHAN SINGH ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
Mr. Kuldeep Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate, for the complainant. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
1.
Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No.
Date Section(s) Police Station District Mohan Singh 08.04.2025 316(2), 318(4), 336(3) of BNS Gandhi Nagar Yamuna Nagar 2.
On 19.05.2025 following order was passed:- "2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the allegation against the petitioner is that deceased, Sohan Singh, prior to marrying the complainant, had appointed the petitioner as his nominee for the insured amount. Consequently, after the death of Sohan Singh on 07.02.2024, the entire insured amount of Rs.50 lakhs was transferred to the bank account of the petitioner.
It is further alleged that the petitioner withdrew a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from the said account. Upon information of the transfer and
withdrawal of the insured amount by the petitioner, complainant, who is none other than the widow of the deceased, lodged the impugned FIR.
3.
It is submitted that after filing the present petition, petitioner has deposited the withdrawn amount of Rs.5,50,000/- back into his bank account. Moreover, the petitioner is willing to repay the entire insured amount to the complainant or the legal heirs of the deceased. Thus, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.
4.
Notice of motion.
5.
On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter.
6.
Adjourned to 27.05.2025.
To be shown in the urgent list.
7.
In the meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed.
8.
It would be open for the petitioner to honour his own statement, as stated today before this Court.
9.
At this stage, counsel for the petitioner informs the Court that, subsequent to the registration of the case, the petitioner's bank account has been blocked. As a result, necessary steps are required to be taken to make the account operational.
10.
Accordingly, it is directed that the investigating agency shall carry out the requisite exercise, to enable the petitioner to transfer the amount to the complainant's bank account, as undertaken by him before this Court."
3.
After transferring of the amount of Rs.30 lacs to the bank account of the complainant, on 21.07.2025, following order was passed:- "ii) Though there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, it is informed on behalf of the learned counsel for the complainant that, out of the total amount of Rs. 50 lacs, Rs. 30 lacs has been transferred to the bank account of the complainant, namely Sheenam, while the petitioner has retained the remaining amount of Rs. 20 lacs in his account. iii) There being no representation on behalf of the petitioner to assist the Court, the matter is adjourned to 25.08.2025.
iv) Interim order to continue."
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an amount of Rs.20 lakhs had been transferred by the petitioner into the bank accounts of the parents of the deceased (Rs.10 lakhs each), and efforts were made to amicably resolve the issue raised by the complainant. 5.
Vide order dated 20.01.2026 passed in CRM-37298-2025, this Court observed that the issue regarding apportionment of the said amount need not be adjudicated in the present proceedings. It was further observed that any person still aggrieved with respect to the amount already paid (Rs.10 lakhs each to the parents of the deceased) would be at liberty to avail an appropriate alternative remedy for redressal of such grievance, which shall be adjudicated in accordance with law. Thereafter, in the main petition, petitioner was directed to join the investigation vide the aforesaid order dated 20.01.2026. 6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that in compliance of the order dated 20.01.2026, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully cooperated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.
7.
Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 8.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
9.
Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated
20.01.2026 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.
However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 10.
Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.
However, present order would be subject to the submission of passport of the petitioner to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses, within a period of one week from today. Otherwise, he would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.
It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 20.03.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned:
YES/NO Whether Reportable:
YES/NO