218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sarvjeet Singh @ Garry ….Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ….Respondent Date of Decision: February 03, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 03, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. K.S. Nalwa, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vismaad S. Bajwa, Advocate, Ms. Ashima Attri, Advocate and Mr. Ashmeet K. Shah, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Priyanka Sadar Thakur, Senior DAG Haryana. Mr. Pradeep Duhan, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

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 bearing FIR No.0265 dated 19.06.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), at Police Station Chandimandir, District Panchkula.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that complainant, namely, Malkiat Singh, alleged fraud amounting to ₹1 crore against Tarun and Gary. The complainant stated that during 1996–1997, agricultural land belonging to his family situated in Village Kundi, Panchkula was acquired by the Government. Using the compensation received, the family purchased land in Naraingarh, where they undertook farming and dairy activities. A portion of the compensation amount remained pending with HSVP (HUDA), for which the authorities already possessed the family’s bank account details.

It is alleged that Sunil Kumar Bansal, an Accountant in HUDA, fraudulently withdrew money using the complainant’s family bank account information. Subsequently, officials of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted a raid at the complainant’s residence on 23.01.2024. During the raid, no incriminating material was found; however, ED officials seized the family’s bank account documents for examination. After the ED raid, the complainant’s parents contacted his uncle Jasmer Singh, who, at the instance of Jaswinder, approached MLA Kulwant Singh. The MLA referred them to his personal assistant, Tarun. Tarun, along with his associate Gary (petitioner herein), allegedly demanded ₹1 crore, claiming that they could prevent any further action by the ED. The complainant stated that his father, along with Jasmer Singh and Jaswinder, arranged the demanded amount by availing loans and selling gold. The said amount was handed over to Tarun and Gary on 23.01.2024 and 24.01.2024. The complainant further stated that he has preserved audio recordings relating to the said transactions. Thereafter, the complainant and his family visited the ED office on multiple occasions and discovered that Tarun and Gary had not paid any money to ED officials and had thereby cheated them. It is further alleged that the accused thereafter began intimidating the complainant and his family with threats of arrest and demanded an additional amount of ₹8 crores.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2025. Learned Senior counsel has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned Senior counsel has iterated that entire genesis/ edifice of the prosecution case does not survive since Kulwant Singh (MLA) has not been arrayed as an accused. Learned Senior counsel has further argued that somewhat similarly placed co-accused, namely, Taranjeet Singh @ Tarun has been extended concession of ad interim bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 06.10.2025 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).15049/2025, and the said interim order is enuring till date. Learned Senior counsel has further iterated that investigation qua the petitioner is complete and the challan already stands filed. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the