Ritik Saini vs State Of Haryana

Ritik Saini

….Petitioner

Versus State of Haryana

….Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI Present: Mr. Kartar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG, Haryana. Ms. Manita Dalla, Advocate for the complainant.

****** RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a statement at Bar that he has come present with a demand draft No.981104 dated 22.09.2026 of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) in the name of the complainant Mandeep Singh. He also states that the petitioner has instructed him to hand over the said draft to the complainant.

Ms. Manita Dalla, Advocate appears for the complainant and has filed her Vakalatnama. It be placed on record after scanning. She makes a statement at Bar that the complainant Mandeep Singh is physically present in the Court. Upon having instructions from the complainant and on his identification by PSI Dilbag Singh, Investigating Officer of the FIR in question, she states that the complainant is ready to accept the abovestated demand draft and on receipt of the same, since the amount allegedly siphoned off from account of the complainant and received in the account of the petitioner is Rs.60,000/- only, will have no objection if the petitioner is granted concession of anticipatory bail in the FIR in question.

Allegations against the petitioner and his co-accused are that on the pretext of procuring a girl partner to the complainant, they induced him to part money on various occasions and total money transferred by the complainant in various accounts was Rs.7,68,943/-. As per the prosecution case, out of the said amount of Rs.7,68,943/-, only Rs.60,000/- were transferred in the account of the petitioner and were withdrawn therefrom.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has inter alia contended that irrespective of the allegations contained in the FIR in question but under protest, the petitioner has prepared a demand draft of Rs.60,000/- in the name of the complainant Mandeep Singh and has handed over the said draft to his counsel today in the Court. He has produced a receipt given by the complainant on photostat copy of the said demand draft. It be placed on record after scanning. He also states that except for the abovestated amount of Rs.60,000/-, the petitioner did not receive any amount in any manner in respect of the contents of the FIR in question. The petitioner as per him is ready to join investigation and to cooperate with the investigating agency on all material counts.

On the other hand, learned State counsel although has opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, yet, has stated that the alleged amount received by the petitioner was Rs.60,000/- only in the case in question.

Ms. Manita Dalla, Advocate, however, makes a statement at Bar that since the complainant has received the abovestated demand draft of Rs.60,000/-, the complainant, who is present in the Court, has instructed her to state that the complainant has no objection for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Be that as it may, without commenting anything upon merits of the FIR/case in question but considering the totality of the facts/circumstances involved therein especially when the petitioner has repaid the alleged amount received by him in the case in question and the complainant has no objection for grant of anticipatory bail to him, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves to be granted the said concession.

In view thereof, the petitioner is directed to join investigation of the FIR/case in question with the concerned Investigating Officer within a period of 30 days from today. In the event of his arrest in the said FIR, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the said Officer. On such bail, he, however, shall comply with the term/s and condition/s contained in Sections 480(3) and 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whichever is applicable.

Petition is disposed off accordingly. Interim application/s, if any, also stand/s disposed off.

[ RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI ]

23.09.2026 JUDGE