Vijender Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 06.04.2026 VIJENDER SINGH ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Rishav Kamboj, Advocate, and Mr. Akshit Golen, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. AG, Haryana. Mr. Anshuman Dalal, Advocate, and Ms. Tamanna, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

**** 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 & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Vijender Singh, aged about 58 years 20.03.2025 379 of IPC (Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC were added later on) Dadri City Charkhi Dadri 2.

On 23.06.2025, following order was passed:-

"2.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that complainant namely Naveen was married to Parmila (daughter of petitioner) in the year 2016. She died under suspicious circumstances at her matrimonial home on 24.04.2024, which resulted into registration of criminal case i.e. FIR No.0096 dated 25.04.2024 u/s 306, 498-A and 34 IPC, at Police Station Asauda, District Jhajjar, against complainant-Naveen and his family members. Trial in the said case is still pending. 3.

As a counter blast, petitioner is being victimized on account of a false complaint and registration of FIR at the behest of complainant - Naveen, alleging that he had taken a loan of Rs.10 lacs and transferred the said loan amount from his SBI account to the SBI account of his wife Parmila (daughter of petitioner) at Charkhi Dadri Branch. Said transaction was made on 11.12.2023. Further alleged that after the suicide of complainant's wife, her ATM card and all documents were taken away from the complainant's house, by the brother and father of Parmila-deceased and thereupon, they withdrew an amount of Rs.10 lacs from the account of his wife after her death.

4.

Counsel for the petitioner also contends that petitioner is an ex-serviceman, who has unblemished record of 30 years of service. In fact, petitioner is the registered nominee in the said bank account, bearing No.35061849635 at SBI Charkhi Dadri. He was nominated by his own daughter Parmila from the inception of the account. Thus, it cannot be said that any kind of fraud is played by the petitioner. Moreover, if the facts are examined chronologically, it would be apparent that a false case has been registered against the petitioner to take revenge of complainant's involvement in the case of death of the daughter of the petitioner. In fact, present FIR has been lodged for pressurizing the petitioner and his family members to withdraw FIR No.0096 (supra). Further submits that petitioner is ready to join investigation and to fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter. Mr. Anshumaan Dalal, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant, and files his vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record.

Counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the contention raised by counsel for the petitioner, by submitting that it is after the death of Parmila that petitioner withdrew the amount from the bank account. However, he is unable to dispute the specific stand taken by the petitioner that he was mentioned as a nominee in the bank account, since inception.

6.

Adjourned to 11.09.2025.

7.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on adinterim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

8.

Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court."

3.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 23.06.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated.

He further submits that even the ATM card(s) which were used for withdrawal of the amount, have also been handed over to the investigating officer. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that although the petitioner has joined the investigation, but he did not fully cooperate with the investigating agency. It is further submitted that the FDR of an amount of Rs.2 lacs was encashed by the petitioner on 18.07.2024, whereas his daughter Parmila had passed away on 24.04.2024.

5.

On being asked by the Court, learned State counsel could not provide a satisfactory explanation as to how the Investigating Officer

could be certain that the amount was withdrawn solely by the petitioner or his family members, especially when no action has been taken against any bank employee who may have colluded with the accused to facilitate the withdrawal, or who cleared the cheque despite absence of the original account or FDR holder.

6.

In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the adinterim bail order dated 23.06.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute, and 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. 7.

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 06.04.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO