CRM-M/42404/2026 of ANIL JINDAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR on 10 September 2026

1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.204 dated 09.10.2025 under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sector 31, Faridabad, Haryana. This is the first petition for anticipatory bail.

2. While issuing notice of motion on 10.08.2026, following order was passed:- “........... As per FIR, lodged by Mohit Goyal s/o Ram Gopal Goyal, he met the petitioner in 2014 and on his assurance, ₹ invested 5,05,00,000/- in M/s Trustworthy Gems and Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. For some time, he continued to receive returns on the

₹ money. Later, on request, petitioner returned 1,60,00,000/-, ₹ however, remaining amount of 3,45,00,000/- was not returned. When he demanded principal amount along with returns, petitioner again gave him false assurances of transfer of property but no property of any kind was transferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on prima facie reading of the FIR, no offence under Section 406/420 IPC was made out against the petitioner. He further argues that the matter had since been compromised with the complainant and in lieu of the remaining amount, petitioner had transferred four flats in favour of complainant's family members. The details of all the FIRs registered against the petitioner were given in the chart (Annexure P-10). Petitioner was ready and willing to join investigation and deserved the concession of anticipatory bail. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail arguing that the police was still investigating the matter and there may be other victims involved. She, however, concedes that at present, complainant is the only victim. It is submitted that petitioner was involved in 87 other FIRs. Mr. Deepender Pratap Singh, Advocate files his power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2, which is taken on record. He concedes the factum of the compromise by way of Annexure P-2 dated 15.05.2026. He further submits that a petition for quashing of the FIR by way of compromise had already been filed.

In the facts and circumstances, petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating/Arresting Officer and join investigation within one week or as and when required. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating/Arresting Officer shall release the petitioner on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing personal/surety bonds to his/her satisfaction. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Adjourned to 10.09.2026.”

3. Learned State counsel submits that petitioner did join investigation, however, he opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioner has not cooperated in the investigation and has not disclosed the modus operandi of the offence. Further that he was involved in 87 other FIRs. He thus, prays for dismissal of the petition.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2, however, submits that the matter had been duly settled vide settlement deed, Annexure P2 and there was nothing outstanding.

5. The offence under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 Indian Penal Code is compoundable in nature. Claims of respondent No.2/complainant have been satisfied. Pursuant to order of this Court dated 10.08.2026, petitioner has joined investigation. Considering all relevant facts and circumstances, but without commenting on merits of the case, the petition is allowed and order dated 10.08.2026, granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner, is made absolute, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 10.09.2026

JUDGE Sumit Singla Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No