Dismissed¶¶38

Navreet Singh Alias Navneet Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Dec 2025CRM-M/6941/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh; interim bail conditioned on deposit of Rs.19 lakhs to check bona fides; petitioner confined in co-accused/other case FIR No.272 dated 26.09.2023 (earlier mis-recorded as FIR No.27 dated 26.09.2022); FIR No.352 dated 10.12.2023, Sections 120-B, 406, 420 IPC, Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC, Section 24 Emigration Act 1983, Police Station Sadar Ratia, District Fatehabad; CRM-M-6941-2025; High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; Sanjay Vashisth, J.; decision date 10.12.2025; speaking/reasoned, not reportable.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to withdraw the petition and file a fresh regular bail petition after getting bail and coming out of jail in FIR No.272 dated 26.09.2023 (Police Station Sadar Ratia, District Fatehabad). ¶¶38

Navreet Singh Alias Navneet Singh Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

CRM-M-6941-2025

¶2

¶3

225 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-6941-2025

¶5

Decided on: 10.12.2025

¶6

Navreet Singh @ Navneet Singh

¶7

…...Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Haryana …...Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶11

Present: Mr. G.S.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Satbir Singh Goripuia, DAG, Haryana.

¶13

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

¶14

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR No.352 dated 10.12.2023 under Sections 120-B, 406 and 420 IPC (Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 24 of Emigration Act, 1983 added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar Ratia District Fatehabad.

¶15

An amount of Rs.19 lakhs was got deposited in the bank account of petitioner’s wife, therefore, while hearing the petition on 07.08.2025, following order was recorded:

¶16

“Present: Mr. G.S. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, DAG, Haryana.

¶17

-.-

¶18

1. It has already been recorded in the order dated 29.07.2025 that, as per the prosecution's case, an amount of Rs.19 lakhs was deposited into the account of the petitioner, and thereafter, the said amount was transferred by the petitioner to the bank account of his wife, namely

¶19

SONIA BURA 2025.12.12 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-6941-2025

¶21

¶22

Baljit Kaur (wrongly mentioned as Manjit Kaur in the previous order dated 29.07.2025). The cash amount was then withdrawn by the petitioner. Now, his wife is all alone, there is no one else in the family to repay the amount.

¶23

2. In view of this, to check the bona fide of the petitioner and only for the purpose to give him one chance, to make arrangements for depositing of amount of Rs.19 lakhs, petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail, uptil the next date of hearing, subject to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶24

3. List on 08.09.2025.

¶25

4. To be shown in the urgent list.”

¶26

On the next date of hearing i..e 08.09.2025, counsel for the petitioner expressed his difficulty as to, why amount could not be deposited, therefore, by recording the reasons for the same, following order was passed:

¶27

“Present: Mr. G.S. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶28

Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

¶29

****

¶30

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2025, to enable him to pay an amount of ₹19.00 lakhs to the complainant/victim, however, since the petitioner is already confined in another case, i.e., FIR No.27 dated 26.09.2022, registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadar Ratia, District Fatehabad, he could not be released from jail. Consequently, the object of making payment to the complainant/victim could not be achieved. Learned counsel therefore prays that the period of interim bail be extended for a

¶31

SONIA BURA 2025.12.12 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶32

CRM-M-6941-2025

¶33

¶34

further period of six weeks, during which time he shall also persuade the petitioner to settle the dispute in the aforesaid other case, i.e., FIR No.27 dated 26.09.2022 (supra).

¶35

2. List again on 28.10.2025.

¶36

Meanwhile, interim order of bail dated 07.08.2025, shall continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶37

Mr. G.S.Verma, Advocate submits that, in fact, FIR number is wrongly recorded in the previous order dated 08.09.2025 instead of FIR No.27 dated 26.09.2022 it has to be FIR No.272 dated 26.09.2023. Further submits that since petitioner could not come out of jail in the criminal case mentioned hereinabove, as of now, he be granted permission to withdraw the instant petition for grant of regular bail with liberty to file afresh one after getting bail and coming out of the jail in the aforementioned case.

¶38

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought and recorded hereinabove.

¶39

10.12.2025 sonia

¶40

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶41

Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/ NO Whether Reportable: YES /NO

¶42

SONIA BURA 2025.12.12 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Navreet Singh Alias Navneet Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navreet Singh Alias Navneet Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bela Bansal and Ors. Vs Shree Hari Spintex Ltd.

Durga Prasad Chandel Alias Dhruv Vs State of Haryana

Ramkumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Kamaljeet Singh Alias Bachchi Vs State of Haryana

Amit Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Palwinder Singh Alias Pappa Vs State of Punjab