Nirmal Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 20 March, 2026

CRM-M-63661-2025                                                          1

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
112
                                                CRM-M-63661-2025
                                               Decided on: 20.03.2026
Nirmal Kumar
                                                                  ......Petitioner

                                        Versus
State of Haryana                                              ......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:      Mr. Zorawar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

              Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

                      ****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,

2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First

Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name & FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District age of No. Petitioner

(s) Nirmal 200 02.05.2022 406, 420 IPC Model Town Rewari Kumar, and Section 3 Rewari aged 66 of Haryana years Protection Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 (HPIDFE)

2. On 12.11.2025, following order was passed:-

"1. xxx

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the orders passed by this Court and by the Coordinate Benches,

1 of 6

appended as Annexures P-8 to P-11 (pertaining to both anticipat Annexures P-8 to P-11 ory and regular bail matters), wherein co- accused of the petitioner have already been granted the concession of bail.

3. To claim parity, learned counsel submits that the petitioner's case is squarely covered by the order dated 02.02.2 order dated 02.02.2024 order dated 02.02.2024, passed in CRM- M- 024 CRM-M64412-2023 (O&M), titled as "Devender Pal Singh v. State of Haryana" (Annexure P-8), as the petitioner herein was also an erstwhile Director of the Company, namely M/s Karambhoomi Real Estate Limited, from which he resigned in the year 2014. It is further submitted that the offences alleged in the FIR are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. The petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation, if protected from arrest. Accordingly, he prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On advance notice, learned State counsel puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions. And, in case of necessity, to file status report by verifying the submissions addressed by the petitioner's counsel.

6. At this stage, Mr. Rahul Yadav, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant and files his memo of appearance. He undertakes to file his Vakalatnama in due course of time.

7. Adjourned to 10.02.2026 10.02.2026 10.02.2026.

8. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

2 of 6

9. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.

10. To be heard along with CRM-M-15458-2024 CRM-M- 15458-2024 CRM-M-15458-2024. "

3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that, in compliance with the order dated 12.11.2025

passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation and has

extended full cooperation. He, therefore, prays for confirmation of the

interim anticipatory bail order.

4. Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of

affidavit of Dr. Surender Sheoran HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police,

HQ, Rewari, in Court today. Same is taken on record. Registry is directed

to tag the same at appropriate place.

Learned State counsel submits that although the petitioner

has joined the investigation, he has not cooperated fully. Accordingly, he

prays for dismissal of the present petition.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

paper-book.

6. In the status report, it has been admitted by the

respondent/State that the main accused, namely Manoj Sengar and

Devender Pal Singh, were key functionaries of the company floated by

them in the name of Karam Bumi Real Estate Limited. They invited

applications along with investments from more than 1,500 persons under

3 of 6

a Multiple Investment Scheme. In this manner, company is alleged to

have committed fraud amounting to a total of ₹2,85,73,585/-. Role of the

petitioner, who is one of the Directors holding a 35% share, is also

noticed; it is alleged that he had resigned on 28.03.2014 and has already

joined the investigation. Paragraph Nos. 10 to 12 of the status report are

reproduced as under:

"10. That co-accused Devender Pal Singh was joined in the investigation of the case, in pursuance of the order dated 30.12.2023 passed by this Hon'ble Court as passed in CRM-M 64412 of 2023. He was notionally arrested. He was interrogated. However, he had not co-operated with the investigation of the case and had not facilitated the recovery of the embezzled amount. Further he had not disclosed about the complicity of the other persons in the commission of the present crime. The investigation against the co- accused Devender Pal Singh is still pending. True translated reproduction of the disclosure statement of co-accused Devender Pal Singh is being appended to along with the present affidavit as Annexure R2.

11. That as per investigation, the prime accused Manoj Sengar and Devender Pal Singh were the key functionaries of the Company floated by them. They had induced innocent people to part with their hard-earned money and had embezzled the same. The accused Manoj Sengar, who had been arrested during the course of the investigation of the case, had duly disclosed the complicity of co-accused Devender Pal Singh and Rajni Singh as well. Rajni had also been associated with the investigation of the case on 23.10.2025 and 26.10.2025. She was interrogated with regards to the allegations levelled against her, having been on interim anticipatory bail. The interrogation report of the said Rajni Singh is being appended to along with the present affidavit as Annexure R3.

4 of 6

12. That the petitioner happens to be the named accused in the FIR. As per the record, collected during the course of investigation, the petitioner happens to be director in the company and had played a pivotal role in the commission of the crime and innocent persons had been duped. The petitioner was privy to the commission of the crime complained off in the FIR. Being director of the bogus company, the petitioner had was to receive 35% share out of the proceeds of the profit. This fact is evident from the list of the promotors,submitted to the Registrar of Companies, Kanpur, by the Directors of the company. The copy of the said list is being appended to along with the present affidavit as Annexure R4. The company had opened branches in various cities involving several persons. From the amount collected by the company, Manoj Kumar Sengar had purchased property in the name of the Company in his own name and in the name of co-accused Devener Pal and Rajeshwari. The Company had assured handsome return on maturity of the investment; however, the Company never returned the money upon maturity. The money had been utilized in purchasing properties and catering to the personal expenses by the accused persons."

7. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and the

charges are required to be proved on the basis of official records, bank

records, bank accounts, and statements of the aggrieved persons, this

Court does not find it appropriate at this stage to subject the petitioner to

custodial interrogation. Accordingly, ad-interim bail order dated

12.11.2025 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Present petition

is, therefore, allowed.

5 of 6

It is made clear that petitioner shall continue to join the

investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms

and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

8. However, it is clarified that in case the passport or an