Parmod Kumar v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 25.02.2026 PARMOD KUMAR ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. L.K. Narang, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

**** 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 FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Parmod Kumar, aged about 44 years 28.03.2024 177, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC Sector-5 Panchkula 2.

On 23.12.2025, following order was passed:- "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 FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Parmod Kumar, aged about 44 years 28.03.2024 177, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC Sector-5 Panchkula 2.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that as per the allegations, a fake and fabricated Cabinet agenda dated 15.12.2023, containing Item Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9, purportedly proposed by the CM/ACS (Revenue), was prepared by the accused persons to facilitate the release of land in records of the office of the Director, Land Records, Haryana. As per the said fabricated agenda, a Cabinet meeting was shown to have been held on 21.12.2023. 3.

Learned Senior Counsel further submits that, in fact, the land in question, for release of which the alleged fake and fabricated agenda was prepared, had already been acquired in the year 2007-2008, and the acquisition amount had been duly deposited by the concerned department in the names of the actual landowners.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, learned AAG, Haryana, appears on behalf of the respondent-State and, on instructions from PSI Tejinder Pal Singh, submits that the land was acquired for a housing society in village Badshahpur, District Gurugram, and that some portion thereof remained unacquired.

By projecting the said portion as released land on the basis of the fake and fabricated agenda, co-accused Sunil Saharan allegedly received an amount of Rs.4.80 crores, partly through banking channels and partly in cash, from Mahender Kumar and Ashok Sindhwani, who are property dealers in District Gurugram.

6.

At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner argues that the dispute, in essence, appears to be of a monetary nature between the property dealers themselves, as the alleged amount had been paid much prior to the date projected in the forged agenda dated 15.12.2023.

It is further contended that the forged agenda was never acted upon and, significantly, name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR. Coaccused Sunil Saharan was arrested on 11.07.2025, and it was only on the basis of his subsequent disclosure statement dated 16.07.2025 that petitioner was sought to be implicated in the present case, with the allegation that the forged agenda had been prepared by him on his laptop.

7.

Learned Senior Counsel further submits that petitioner has no interest whatsoever either in the acquisition or in the release of the land in question. There is no allegation that any amount was paid to the petitioner for the preparation of alleged fake and fabricated agenda. Moreover, petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and to hand over his laptop to the investigating agency, provided he is protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, learned Senior Counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

8.

Adjourned to 25.02.2026.

9.

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 ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

10.

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 23.12.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel on instructions from PSI Tajinder Pal Singh, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation by the petitioner. However, he submits that although, laptop of the petitioner has been recovered and said fact has even been mentioned in the status report dated 20.02.2026, which is already appended with the present petition, but petitioner has neither handed over the mobile phone which was in operation at the relevant time bearing a particular IMEI number, nor he has surrendered his passport to the investigating officer. 5.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation; adinterim bail order dated 23.12.2025, 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. 7.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

8.

However, it would be open for the prosecution to move an application for cancellation of the present bail order, if petitioner does not join the investigation in future, and if he does not hand over the mobile phone (which has been indicated here above) to the investigating officer, and also the passport, which he possesses, within a period of two weeks 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 conditions are not complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically. 9.

With the directions issued here above, present petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 25.02.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO