Bunty Singh Alias Banti Singh Alias Baba v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-29475-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29475-2026 Date of Decision: 27.05.2026 Bunty Singh alias Banti Singh alias Baba

...Petitioner

vs.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

Coram :

Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present :

Mr. Rajat Sheokand, Advocate with Mr. Parmish, Advocate and Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

*** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.184, dated 11.08.2025 registered under Sections 34, 406, 420, and 506 of IPC (now Sections 3(5), 316, 318, 351 of BNS, 2023), at Police Station Sadar, District Panipat.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the complainant was allegedly cheated in the month of March 2023, whereas the FIR was registered on 11.08.2025; this delay in registering the FIR casts a cloud of suspicion over the entire prosecution case. Learned counsel further submits that there was a financial dispute between the petitioner and the complainant and by concocting a false story, the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case. Even the petitioner had not met any victim, as alleged by the complainant in the present case. Apart from that, the petitioner was arrested in the present HEMLATA 2026.05.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-29475-2026 -2case on 18.03.2026 and is in custody for the last more than two months. After conclusion of investigation, challan has already been presented before the Area Magistrate and all the offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate only. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any purpose. 3.

On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Anil, has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner. However, he admits that there was no other case against the petitioner and he is the first offender.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

In the present case, the petitioner has admittedly been in custody for over two months and all the alleged offences are triable by a Court of Magistrate. Challan has already been presented before the trial Court and the conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 7.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 27.05.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.05.27 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document