230 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Satish Kumar ….Petitioner versus State of Haryana ….Respondent Date of decision: January 12, 2026 Date of Uploading: January 12, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Shivam Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana.

*****

SSUUMMEEEETT GGOOEELL,, JJ.. ((OORRAALL))

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.20 dated 14.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (challaned under Sections 7, 13(1)(B) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act), registered at Police Station ACB, Faridabad.

2. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that on 14.07.2025, Inspector Santram of the State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Faridabad, received directions from senior officers to reach the District Court, Palwal to verify a complaint and conduct raiding proceedings. After obtaining the gazetted officer appointment order from the Superintendent of Police, the concerned gazetted officer was contacted and instructed to reach the court premises along with a government employee. A raiding team comprising Inspector Ravindra Kumar, SI Sanjeev Kumar, SI Brijpal, SI Charanjeet, EHC Manoj Kumar, Ct. Ombir, and EHC Pritam was constituted and reached the parking area of the District Court, Palwal. Hitesh Kumar, XEN, Mechanical Division, Irrigation Department, Faridabad, was present there with his driver Shiv Kumar, who was appointed as the shadow witness. Inspector Santram then contacted the complainant Shri Lalit Bindal, who called him to Advocate Chamber No.312, Palwal. The raiding team reached the said chamber, where the complainant was present and was introduced to the gazetted officer and the shadow witness. The complaint was verified by Inspector Santram and the gazetted officer.

The complainant alleged that Satish Kumar (petitioner herein), clerk/accountant at the Market Committee, Palwal, had demanded and accepted illegal gratification for processing the transfer of allotment letters and issuance of completion certificates in respect of Booth Nos.271 and 272, New Sabzi Mandi, Palwal, which belonged to his aunt Smt. Rajrani Bindal and were transferred to her grandson, namely, Ram Bindal. An initial bribe ₹

of 50,000/- had already been paid, followed by further demands of ₹ ₹

60,000/-, and later 1,20,000/-, claiming that part of the amount was for the Market Committee Secretary and threatening imposition of a heavy fine.

On the same day, the complainant and his nephew met the ₹

accused, and the bribe amount was settled at 1,30,000/-. The complainant expressed unwillingness to pay the bribe and informed that he had recorded the conversation regarding the demand of illegal gratification on his mobile phone.

On the basis of these allegations, an FIR in question was registered and information was conveyed to senior officers. Thereafter, a raid was conducted in Advocate Chamber No.312, search of the complainant was carried out in the presence of the gazetted officer, and further legal proceedings were undertaken. Upon collecting sufficient evidence, Satish Kumar (petitioner herein) was arrested in the present case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 14.07.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has iterated that there is no recovery of any money directly from the petitioner, but it is the case of the prosecution that money was placed into the dash-board of the car of the petitioner, which, in-fact, was placed by the complainant so as to trap the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that in any case, the challan already stands presented and the trial will take long time. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4.