CRM-M/35445/2026 of TARUN GOEL @ ARUN GOYAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 22 July 2026

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35445

35445-

IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG

Tarun Goel @

State of Hary

Date of Date of Date of Date of Decis Decis Decis 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

grant of regu 11.09.2025, r 419, 420 of IP

2. conspiracy w ₹35,00,000/- installation of

3. in custody sin been falsely

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-35445

35445-2 @ Tarun Goyal Versus yana sion sion sion sion: : : : July 22 July 22 July 22 July 22, 2026

ading: ading: ading: ading: July 22 July 22 July 22 July 22, 2026

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME Mr. Shailesh Aggarwal, Advocate Ms. Nikita, Advocate for the petit Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Sen ***** ***** ***** ***** OEL OEL OEL OEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed un ular bail to the petitioner, in ca registered for the offences punis PC, 1860, at Police Station Sector The gravamen of the FIR in qu with his co-accused, allegedly chea on the false pretext of procurin f CCTV cameras. Learned counsel for the petitione nce 28.03.2026. Learned counsel h implicated into the FIR in quest

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

….Petitioner …Respondent EET GOEL EET GOEL EET GOEL EET GOEL e and tioner. nior DAG Haryana. nder Section 483 of the BNSS for ase bearing FIR No.0154 dated shable under Sections 171, 406, r 7, District Panchkula. uestion is that the petitioner, in ated the complainant of a sum of ng a government tender for the er has argued that the petitioner is has iterated that the petitioner has tion. Learned counsel has further r t r d , n f e s s r MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35445

35445-2026

urged that prime role attributed to the petitioner is that he had introduced the complainant-side to his brother, namely, Vipul Goel. Learned counsel has further submitted that, assuming arguendo, the prosecution version is taken to be correct, the complainant-side made payment during the year 2017-18, whereas, FIR in question was registered in September 2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man aged 40 years and is the sole bread-earner of his family. The petitioner is having clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. It has been submitted that the FIR in question was got registered late by the complainant- side as the accused-side kept on alluring them to return back the money. Learned counsel seeks to place on record the custody certificate dated 21.07.2026, in the Court today, 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 28.03.2026, whereinafter, the investigation was carried out and the challan qua the petitioner has been presented on 27.05.2026 and charges were framed on 10.06.2026. Total 15 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which none has been examined till date. Keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially factum of the transactions having taken place in the year 2017-18, whereas, the FIR in question was registered in the year 2025, the trial in question being a magisterial one, challan having been presented and the same being underway, & the petitioner being a man with clean antecedents; this MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35445

35445-2026

Court is inclined to affirmatively consider the plea in hand. The rival contention raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall essentially 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 21.07.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 03 months and 21 days, & the petitioner is not shown to be involved in any other FIR(s).

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 allowed allowed allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, 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 cellphone 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. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-35445

35445-2026

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 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.

11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE July July July July 22

22, 2026

mahavir

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable:

Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.07.22 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment