CRM-M/33090/2026 of MANOJ BANSAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 27 July 2026

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-33090

IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG Manoj Bansal State of Harya

Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Uploa Date of Uploa Date of Uploa Date of Uploa

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

Present Present Present Present:

SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO

Nagarik Surak anticipatory b registered for IPC, 1860 (S Sections 13(2) Police Station Haryana.

2. 0-2026

GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-33090

33090-2 l

versus ana

ion: ion: ion: ion: July July July July 27

27, 2026

ading: ading: ading: ading: July July July July 28, 2026

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEE Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocate for t Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana ***** ***** ***** ***** OEL OEL OEL OEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed un ksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BN bail to the petitioner, in case offences punishable under Section ections 61(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3 ), 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prev n ACB Rohtak, District State Vig On 05.06.2026, the following orde “Learned counsel for the petiti question alleges that the co-accused M Barhi, in collusion with co-accused Han fictitious purchase and sale bills or got firm has started production; that the said extension fee; that FIR then alleges that the petitioner, Estate Officer of HSIIDC actual position in the premises of the firm the co-accused Manjeet Balhara and Ha concession of anticipatory bail by thi respectively; that case against the petitio

HARYANA AT HARYANA AT HARYANA AT HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH

....Petitioner

....Respondent ET GOEL ET GOEL ET GOEL ET GOEL the petitioner. a. nder Section 482 of the Bhartiya NSS’) for grant of concession of FIR No.0025 dated 30.07.2025, ns 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the 3), 340(2) of the BNS, 2023) and vention of Corruption Act, 1988, at ilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau, er was passed: tioner has inter alia argued that FIR in Manjeet Balhara, Manager of HSIIDC, ns Raj Maggu, owner of a firm, prepared the same prepared to show that the said id documents were prepared only to save at the said documents were forwarded by C, to higher office without verifying the rm; that the said allegations are false; that Hans Raj Maggu have both been granted his Court vide Annexures P-6 and P-7 oner, if compared to the said co-accused,

r t a f , e d t , n C, d d e y e t d d, MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.28 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-33090

33090-2026

is on much lighter side in severity; that till date the police has not even verified as to whether production in the firm in question is going on or not; that such production, at the spot had started when the above-stated documents were submitted; and that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and further to cooperate with the investigating agency on all material counts. Notice of motion. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl.A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State of Haryana and prays for time to file a status report. At his request, adjourned to 24.07.2026 for the said purpose. However, considering the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the totality of the facts/circumstances of the present case but without commenting anything upon merits of the FIR/matter in question, the petitioner is directed to join investigation with the concerned investigating officer within seven days from today. It is also ordered that in the event of his arrest in the FIR in question, he shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of such officer. However, on such bail, he shall comply with the term/s and condition/s contained in Sections 437(3) and 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.” ” ” ”

3. Learned State counsel (on instructions) has stated that pursuant to the order dated 05.06.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation, but his custodial interrogation is required in view of the serious allegations against him.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the State and upon perusal of the record; especially in view of the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is being sought only in view of the serious allegations against him; the interim order dated 05.06.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

5. Petition stands allowed allowed allowed allowed, accordingly.

6. This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read as granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.

7. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.28 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-33090

33090-2026

stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 or upon showing any other sufficient cause.

8. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July 27 July 27 July 27 July 27, 2026

mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.28 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment