CRM-M/42632/2026 of NASIB SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 7 August 2026

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.367 dated 16.11.2025 under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 344 and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 7, 12 and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Butana, District Karnal.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question pertains to defalcation of paddy worth ₹2.61 crore.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 26.6.2026. Learned senior counsel has further urged that co-accused namely Randhir Singh has been afforded the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.5.2026 passed in CRM-M No.18550 of 2026, whereas, other co- accused Jasbir Singh and Anil Kumar have been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 16.7.2026 passed in CRM-M No.12197 of 2026 & 20784 of 2026 respectively. Learned senior counsel has further urged that the requisite amount of money, alleged to have been defrauded, had been deposited and a certificate to this effect has already been issued by the District Food Corporation, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Controller, Karnal (copy whereof has been appended alongwith this petition as Annexure P-15). Learned senior counsel has further urged that the petitioner is a man with clean antecedents and has already suffered incarceration for a period of more than 01 month. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 6.8.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.

5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 26.6.2026 wherein after investigation was carried out; challan was presented qua the petitioner on 30.7.2026. It is not in dispute that total 66 prosecution witnesses have been cited but none have been examined till date as charges are yet to be framed. It is thus indubitable that culmination of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1 As per custody certificate dated 6.8.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 01 month and 11 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case.

Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.

7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.

8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9. Ordered accordingly.

10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE 7.8.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable:

Yes/No